Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9 UDC 27 ISSN 1451-0928

ÅASOPIS
Teorijsko glasilo Protestantskog teoloãkog fakulteta u Novom Sadu

TEOLOÃKI

Broj 9

2

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

3

Teoloãki åasopis, broj 9, 2009. godine. Izdavaå: Protestantski teoloãki fakultet u Novom Sadu. Adi Endrea 30, 21000 Novi Sad, Srbija. Tel: +381.(0)21.469-410 Elektronska poãta: nsts@sbb.co.rs Internet stranica: www.nsts-online.org Glavni i odgovorni urednik: prof. dr Dimitrije Popadiñ, dekan. Urednici: mr Nikola Kneæeviñ mr Srœan Sremac. Recenzenti: -prof. dr Heleen Zorgdrager, Ukrainian Catholic University, Ukrajina, Kerk in Actie, Holandija -prof. dr Anne-Marie Kool, Karoly Gaspar Reformed University, Budimpešta, Maðarska; -prof. dr Jasmin Miliñ, Protestantsko teoloãko uåiliãte Mihail Starin, Osijek, Hrvatska; -Kevin Steger, Ph.D. Dallas Baptist University, SAD; -Hank Kanters, D.Min. World Life Centre, Kanada; i -dr Svetislav Rajšiñ, Protestantski teološki fakultet, R. Srbija Prelom: Miloã Moravek Ãtampa: MBM-plas Tiraæ: 500 primeraka ISSN: 1451-0928 UDC: 27

Izdavanje ovog åasopisa finansiralo je Ministarstvo vera Republike Srbije u okviru projekta: "Unapreœivanje verske kulture, verskih sloboda i tolerancije".

4

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9 IZ UVODNIKA PRVOGA BROJA TEOLOÃKOG ÅASOPISA

Teoloãki åasopis je godiãnjak Protestantskog teoloãkog fakulteta u Novom Sadu, u kome se objavljuju radovi profesora i studenata, istorijski dokumenti kao i letopis rada fakulteta. Meœutim, osmiãljen je tako da uskoro moæe da preraste kategoriju godiãnjaka. Åeænja duãe mi je da vidim kako Teoloãki åasopis strategijom kvasca, nenametljivo i nezadræivo, postaje platforma teoloãkog promiãljanja ovde i sada: u naãem duhovnom i kulturnom kontekstu. Upravo ovaj i ovakav kontekst nameñe obavezu ozbiljnog pristupa i tretmana pravoslavne teoloãke misli i to u punini njene istorijske dimenzije. Kontekstualna teoloãka promiãljanja, koja ovaj åasopis priæeljkuje, opravdañe svoj pridev jedino ako budu odraæavala pluralizam hriãñanskih denominacija koji karakteriãe vojvoœansku i ãiru domañu stvarnost. Iz tog razloga, ljubazno pozivam kako pravoslavne tako i katoliåke i protestantsko/evanœeoske teologe i crkvene sluæitelje da svoja bogoslovska razmiãljanja izraze u Teoloãkom åasopisu. Pouåite nas i pouåimo se. Samo istinotraæitelji su istinski Bogotraæitelji. Prof. dr Dimitrije Popadiñ, dekan Protestantski teoloãki fakultet u Novom Sadu

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 NAUÅNI RADOVI Irina Radosavljeviñ. . . . . . 45 Nikola Kneæeviñ Komparativni pristup: Peccatum originale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Lazar Neãiñ Savremena pastirska sluæba crkve . 193 STRUÅNI RADOVI Petar Piliñ Duhovni aspekti bolesti . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183 Dimitrije Popadiñ Twelve Steps in Exegesis of the Acts 15:22-29 . . . . . .Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 5 SADRÆAJ: Reå urednika . . 109 Herman Bauma Praying on the front-line . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141 PREGLEDNI RADOVI Jim Payton An Orthodox Worldview for Life in the 21st Century . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Szabolcs Bene Speaking of God . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 Csongor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Andrej Tarkovski Traganje za neizrecivim . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Sergej Beuk Osnovne biblijske vere . 23 Violeta Cvetkovska Ocokoljiñ Simbolizam praznika pedesetnica: Pisani i slikani izvori . . . .

Andrej Tarkovski The Quest for the Unspeakable . . . 109 Herman Bauma Praying on the Front-Line . . . . . . . . . . . N° 9 TABLE OF CONTENTS: Word Forward by the Editor-in-chief . . . . . . . .6 Teoloãki åasopis. . . . . . . 183 Dimitrije Popadiñ Twelve Steps in Exegesis of the Acts 15:22-29 . . . . . . . . 23 Violeta Cvetkovska Ocokoljiñ Symbolism of the Feast of Pentakost: Written and Painted Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193 PAPER IN APPLIED THEOLOGY Petar Piliñ Spiritual Aspects of Illness . . . . . . . . . 9 Lazar Neãiñ Contemporary Pastoral Ministry of the Church . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141 OVERVIEW PAPERS Jim Payton An Orthodox Worldview for Life in the 21st Century . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Szabolcs Bene Speaking of God . 7 SCIENTIFIC PAPERS Irina Radosavljeviñ. . . 95 Csongor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Nikola Kneæeviñ Comparative Perspective: Peccatum originale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203 . . . . . . . 69 Sergej Beuk Foundations of Biblical Faith . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Verujem da ñe deveti broj Teoloãkog åasopisa pre svega pomoñi åitaocima u daljem razvoju teoloãkog iskustva i saznanja i joã jednom dati svoj doprinos kako celokupnom teoloãkom promiãljanju tako i nauci uopãte. Sagledavajuñi mesto i ulogu Teoloãkog åasopisa unutar verskog konteksta naãe zemlje moæe se slobodno reñi da je njegova uloga afirmativna.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 7 Reå urednika Kao i prethodni brojevi i ovaj broj se moæe pohvaliti sadræajem koji je interdisciplinarnog karaktera. On ima ulogu da kultiviãe teoloãku misao uzimajuñi u obzir sve tri hriãñanske provenijencije. ne samo u teoloãkom veñ i u duhovnom smislu.humanistiåke nauke u jednu koherentnu celinu. razvijajuñi pritom konstruktivni dijalog izmeœu istih. jer svojom verskom i etniåkom ãarolikoãñu na pravi naåin oslikava i naãe druãtveno okruæenje i samim tim pridonosi izgradnji tolerantnijeg druãtva uopãte. veñ i socioloãki. inkorporirajuñi tako sve druãtveno . Na taj naåin dolazi do izraæaja i njegova ekumenska dimenzija. Mr Nikola Kneæeviñ . jer svojim svehriãñanskim stavom doprinosi boljem hermenautiåkom pristupu svetopisamskog otkrivenja i same crkvene predaje. Upravo ovo ilustruje da Teoloãki åasopis nema samo teoloãko .nauåni karakter.

8 Teoloãki åasopis. N° 9 NAUÅNI RADOVI .

Duhovna dimenzija wegovih filmova nije izgraœena religioznim narativom.2010 umetnosti i medija Univerziteta umetnosti u Beogradu irinarados@hotmail.tragawe za neizrecivim Rezime Stvarajuñi svoje filmove. emocionalne izraæajnosti likova i konstruisawa alegorijskih zagonetki iako mu je ovo posledwe åesto pripisivano.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 9 Irina Radosavqeviñ UDK 929:778.03. veñ veãtom upotrebom onih sredstava koji su svojstveni filmu kao mediju.com Andrej Tarkovski . åuveni reæiser Andrej Tarkovski nastojao je da. a ono ãto je nevidqivo i skriveno nije pokuãavao da opisuje i prepriåava.5Tarkovski Andrej diplomirani teolog Originalni nauåni rad Pravoslavnog bogoslovskog Primljeno: 11.2010 fakulteta BUmaster teorije Prihvañeno: 15. gledaocu pruæi priliku za jedno autentiåno duhovno iskustvo.03. Primatan je jak uticaj pravoslavne ikonografije i estetskih sredstava koja ona upotrebqava. Wegov primarni ciq bio je da kamerom uhvati samu sræ æivota u svim wegovim dimenzijama. poniruñi u tajnu postojawa sveta i åoveka. veñ je nastojao da tanano sugeriãe i naznaåi ostavqajuñi tako prostor gledaocu da sam naåini pokret ka neizrecivom. Andrej Tarkovski pripada generaciji posleratnih reæisera koji su stvarali nakon perioda dominacije epskog stila Sergeja Ajzenãtajna u kome je montaæa predstavqala . Tarkovski je teæio oslobaœawu od logike linearnog narativa.

sovjetski kritiåar. u kwizi Vajawe u vremenu on navodi delove pisama koje su mu slali poãtovaoci wegovog rada.To je. Tarkovski je ukazivao i na wene nedostatke pokuãavajuñi da pronaœe prisniji i liåniji naåin izraæavawa u filmskoj umetnosti. Radnik u lewingradskoj fabrici pisao je: „Razlog zaãto Vam piãem je Ogledalo. nakon svega. Kuåev. Iskusio je neprekidnu borbu sa cenzurom i negativnom kritikom unutar SSSR-a. M. uæivajuñi reputaciju mraånog i opskurnog umetnika. a za ispovest je zaista potrebna hrabrost. N° 9 osnovno izraæajno sredstvo. takoœe kritiåar sovjetskog perioda. ne mareñi za sagovornika. u kome autor. 1 A B. ali uvek duboke misli.. http://www. Metalnikov.. Velika je vrlina biti kadar za sluãawe i razumevawe. u ovom filmu dijaloga nema.10 Teoloãki åasopis.nostalghia.com 2 Idem. piãe: „Film Andreja Tarkovskog je filmska ispovest.2 Realnost je ipak bila malo drugaåija. åiji su filmovi nerazumqivi i nejasni.Meœutim. Uvaæavajuñi veliåinu ove filmske ãkole. film o kome ne mogu govoriti. razgovara sam sa sobom“. Ako su dvoje qudi sposbni da makar jednom 1 David Wishard. zato ãto ga æivim. pisao: „Od velikog umetnika oåekujem. An Attempt at Universal Subjectivity. Stvaralaãtvo Tarkovskog je nailazilo na topao i dubok prijem kod odreœenog dela publike i taj odgovor publike ga je hrabrio da istraje uprkos svim teãkoñama. sa dubokim æaqewem moram reñi da je wegov film namewen uskom krugu gledalaca koji su dobro upoznati sa kinematografijom“. . M. prvi princip qudskih odnosa: spremnost da se qudi razumeju i da im se oproste nenamerne greãke. originalne. samo monolog.. wihovi prirodni neuspesi.. Ali. ozbiqan dijalog samnom kao gledaocem. je o filmu Ogledalo. Tako.

Bergman je za wega govorio: „Moje otkrivawe prvog filma Andreja Tarkovskog bilo je ravno åudu. Wegova kritika5 obojena je podrugqivim odnosom prema rediteqevom „velikom misticizmu“. bilo je i drugaåijih miãqewa poput onog Fredrika Xejmsona. o åeæwi za apsolutnim. 1989. 8. netrpeqiv prema bilo kakvoj alegoriji. posmatra kao „otuænu religioznu priåu“ i. Gazing into Time: Tarkovsky and Post-Modern Cinema Aesthetics.). Prometej. Tokom vremena stekli su veliki broj poãtovalaca. onaj koji je stvorio novi jezik. o wegovom smislu. moñi ñe da razumeju jedno drugo. wegovom odnosu prema drugom åoveku. http://www. a drugi u doba elektriciteta. naãao sam se pred vratima sobe åije kquåeve.“3 Filmovi Tarkovskog govore o åoveku. Åak i ako je jedan æiveo u eri mamuta. Bird. jezik koji odgovara prirodi filma. Po sobi u koju sam oduvek æeleo da uœem.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 11 iskuse isto.“4 Ipak. Tarkovski je za mene najveñi. æivot kao san. Novi Sad. Vajawe u vremenu. do tada.com . Umentiåka druæina ANonim. prema sopstvenim neistraæenim dubinama. Stalkera. tumaåa. na primer.nostalghia. 4 Marina Tarkovska (prireœ. U svim nejasnostima i neodreœenostima Xejmson ne vidi zadivqujuñu 3 Andrej Tarkovski. smatra da je glavni junak u svojoj dosadnoj stradalnoj usamqenosti kojom podseña na Hrista mnogo mawe privlaåan nego socijalno neprilagoœena varalica kako je prikazan u izvornom tekstu. koji uspeva da uhvati æivot kao refleksiju. Beograd. Osetio sam ohrabrewe i podsticaj: neko je izraæavao ono ãto sam ja oduvek æeleo da iskaæem a nisam znao kako. on se kretao slobodno i sa lakoñom. a sam Tarkovski status jednog od najznaåajnijih autora svih vremena. 5 Robert. Tragaju za istinom o æivotu. komentatora. svetu. 1999. Odjednom. Tarkovski (prevela Vesna Tovstongov). nisam nikada imao.

alegorijama i drugim stilskim figurama u kojima Tarkovski vidi opasnost od udaqavawa filma od sebe samog. na pogreãnoj strani. Sam Tarkovski je bio protivnik alegorije u filmu. Ipak. On odbacuje postojawe umetniåke autonomije Tarkovskog i wegov opus shvata samo kao izraz wegovih teorijskih postavki. Tarkovskog ne nalazimo jasno i nedvosmisleno iskazan ideoloãki diskurs i da se o takvom diskursu moæe govoriti samo ako se prethodno upoznati autorovi stavovi uåitaju u wegove filmove. a ne samo kao religioznu alegoriju ili izraz odreœene ideologije. Ipak ñe biti da u filmovima A. N° 9 estetiku Tarkovskog veñ samo alegoriju i ideologiju.12 Teoloãki åasopis. Xejmson odbacuje Tarkovskog kao umetnika (wegovo delo vidi kao neuspeli pokret jednog moraliste ka umetniåkom diskursu) zarad Tarkovskog kao alegoriste (mada je sam Tarkovski iskazivao nepoverewe prema alegoriji) koji je uvuåen u ideoloãki konflikt i to. Za razliku od alegorije koja predstavqa formu u kojoj konaåno teæi da se u beskonaånom poniãti i ukine. potcewujuñi estetiku i strukturu wegovih filmova. na æalost. Po wemu. zadivqen je pred wegovom sposobnoãñu da uhvati „istinu u mahovini“ i „momente u kojima elementi govore“. simbol je beskonaåno koje se izraæava u konaånom. pretenziji na umetnost. Xejmson je smatrao da Tarkovski pokuãava da religiozni sadræaj svojih dela opravda. odnosno. Ne uspevajuñi da sagleda celinu wegovog dela. Ne prigovara toliko „religioznom sadræaju“ koliko „umetniåkoj pretencioznosti“. „poetski film“ se svojim slikama udaqava od åiweniånog i konkretnog u oslikavawu stvarnosti afirmisawem sopstvenog ustrojstva i celovitosti. Za wega je usporenost kretawa kamere i glumaca „nepodnoãqiva za sve osim za najvernije poklonike Tarkovskog“. navodno visokom umetnoãñu i duboko æali nad „trenutnim sovjetskim religioznim trendom“ koji vidi kao straãnu zarazu. On daje æivot metaforama. Ova kritika odaje izvesnu nemoguñnost wenog autora da prodre dubqe u umetniåki diskurs Tarkovskog i da osmotri wegovo delo kao celinu. Tako shvañen simbol .

46. cit. Ono ãto je Tarkovski æeleo da izbegne jeste nametnuto intelektualno tumaåewe svojih dela i optereñenost gledalaca tim tumaåewem. Nije neophodno otkriti znaåewe simbola. U „Vajawu u vremenu“ on navodi Vjaåeslava Ivanova i wegov komentar o celovitosti umetniåkog dela koje naziva simbolom i taj navod najboqe govori o wegovom viœewu upotrebe simbola: „Simbol je istinit samo onda kada je neiscrpan i neograniåen u svojim znaåewima.Simboli ne mogu biti drugaåije izraæeni niti objaãweni. veñ disati onim åime oni diãu. boqem i uzviãenijem znaåewu koje tek treba odgonetnuti veñ je neposredno delovalo na gledaoca gradeñi celinu i wen smisao.. govorio je. neposredno i emocionalno.. ali kao sredstva za iskazivawe neiskazivog pri åemu ono ãto je upotrebqavao kao simbol nikada nije gubilo svoje bukvalno znaåewe da bi mesto ustupilo nekom drugaåijem. „Umetnost åini beskonaånost dodirqivom“. kada u svojoj arkani obelodawuje jezik nagoveãtaja i zbliæavawa s neåim ãto ne moæe biti objaãweno. 6 Andrej Tarkovski. i suoåeni sa tajnim znaåewem u wihovom totalitetu.. on je monada i zato po ustrojewu razliåit od kompleksnih i razloæivih alegorija.. poput kristala.. parabola i poreœewa. i u svojoj najveñoj dubini ostaje nedokuåiv. . Uistinu. dok unutar filma simboli lako postaju kliãei koji ga liãavaju realnosti i æivotnosti.. op. On ima mnogo lica i misli. Smatrao je da svaki gledalac treba sam da doæivi film. koristio je simbole. On je oblikovan prirodnim procesom.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 13 bi se mogao povezati sa teæwom Tarkovskog da kroz prikazivawe neposredne stvarnosti iskaæe i ono beskonaåno. da ga posmatra kao ãto se posmatraju zvezde ili more. ãto je nesaopãtivo reåima. Ipak. mi smo bespomoñni“.6 Tarkovski je smatrao da film kao celina treba da predstavqa simbol i nosi znaåewe.

14 Teoloãki åasopis. Ibid.7 Sliku koja je plod liånog doæivqaja i opaæawa stvarnosti i wenih razliåitih dimenzija. tako. ravni åudu. moæete jedino stvoriti wenu sliku“. odnosno. ikonom koja se odupirala linearnoj perspektivi. Andrei Tarkovsky: Elements of Cinema. 73. Smatrao je da je apsurdno traæiti objektivnu istinu te da postoje samo liåne istine. Nalazimo joã jednu potvrdu sliånosti wegovog stila sa sredwevekovnim sakralnim slikarstvom. 2008. To je izraæajnost koja je dovedena do takve preciznosti i lakonizma da prestaje da bude izraæajna. „U posledwih nekoliko godina samo je jedan reæiser uspeo da ostvari åudo. . Reaktion Books. Svojim studentima je govorio : „Nije moguñe fotografisati stvarnost. ali da su retki trenutci u kojima reæiser uspe da postigne joã neko znaåewe. emocionalnoj izra7 8 Robert Bird. Sami glumci sa kojima je radio svedoåe da je wegovo reæirawe uglavnom bilo ograniåeno na pozicirawe u prostoru i pokret. London. 71. dok je uporno izbegavao da sa wima razgovara o onome ãto bi trebalo da misle ili oseñaju. tvorca sveta koji gotovo postaje stvarnost jer u wemu nema niåeg ãto bi se pokazalo veãtaåkim. a to je Andrej Tarkovski“. Tarkovski je æeleo da kamerom uhvati sræ æivota i stvarnosti. Kod wega je sve izbrisano skoro do taåke neizraæajnosti. namernim ili nasilnim u odnosu na jedinstvo.“8 Tarkovski je. poput Bresona odbacivao psihologizaciju likova. to jednostavno znaåi da ne radi i niãta osim toga. Breson je bio wegov veliki uåiteq: „U svojim filmovima Breson se pretvara u demijurga. ali je bio svestan da je to u apsolutnom smislu nemoguñe i da je film ipak iluzija. N° 9 Poqski reæiser Kãiãtof Kiãlovski je jednom prilikom rekao da ukoliko je na filmu prikazan upaqaå koji ne radi.

ali ne izraæajan. svojstveno ikoni). Wega interesuje i druga. u Andreju Rubqovu. sve izgledalo drugaåije. Reãavawe odnosa izmeœu ikone i filma. Tarkovski insistira na realizmu. wegova nevidqiva. ali je na kraju. . Jedinstven. likovi Tarkovskog mogu izgledati bezizraæajno dok se ne sagleda bogatstvo razliåitih pogleda uperenih na wih sa svih moguñih strana. ãto je. realnog åoveka. Ogoqeni realizam dostupan qudskom oku za wega nije kraj priåe o onome ãto æeli da zabeleæi. takoœe. na primer. javqawe mrtvog Teofana. San. slike i narativa. subjektivni svet misli i oseñawa. sneg u crkvi. da gledalac ne primeti da on zapravo glumi. Vrhunac izraæajnosti jeste da bude na svom odgovarajuñem mestu. duhovna dimenzija. Po Tarkovskom. ka subjektivnoj percepciji dogaœaja je ono ãto proæima sve wegove filmove. a ne glumi. ali se na wemu ne zaustavqa.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 15 æajnosti likova i alegorijskim zagonetkama. ponovo. ruska Golgota. pogled ka unutra. Kao i figure na ikoni. Marija i deca u sceni señawa u Nostalgiji ãto je postignuto jednostavnim pretråavawem glumaca sa jednog na drugo mesto kad izaœu iz kadra. Realistiåne scene æivota sredwevekovne Rusije su u Rubqovu izmeãane sa scenama izmeœu sna i jave. utisaka i raspoloæewa. snova i maãte. kao ãto su let balonom. Trebalo bi da bude autentiåno jedinstven. svet onakav kakav je kad proœe kroz prizmu qudskog liånog doæivqaja. Ili scene Ivanovih snova ili señawa nasuprot realistiånim slikama rata u Ivanovom detiwstvu. Zanimqivo da se kod wega javqa i prisutnost istih likova na dva razliåita mesta u jednom istom neprekinutom kadru (ãto je. åak je za film Andrej Rubqov bio kritikovan zbog naturalizma pojedinih scena. jedna od karakteristika ikone. unutraãwa realnost. glumac bi trebalo da prikaæe obiånog. Donatas Banionis je govorio da se åesto oseñao kako prosto pozira. Tarkovski je postavio temeqe i za tehnike upotrebqene u narednim filmovima. U wegovim slikama meãaju se naturalistiåko i numunozno. señawe.

autor jednog eseja 9 Robert Bird. a konfuzna i haotiåna simfonija wenog mrmqawa neprimetno prelazi u istinsku muziku. Pod pojmom poetskog u filmu nije podrazumevao teæwu ka lirizmu i romantici. Ivanovo detiwstvo je bio pravi skok u evoluciji ruskog filma svojom narativnom strukturom zasnovanoj na asocijativnim vezama i tananim prelazima izmeœu sna i jave. najboqi primer nelinearnog narativa predstavqa film Ogledalo u kome je potpuno napuãten vremenski kontinuitet. Gazing into Time: Tarkovsky and Post-Modern Cinema Aesthetics.“9 Zvukovi kod Tarkovskog se neobjaãwivo pojavquju i nestaju åesto varajuñi uho i u pogledu svog izvora. dok je Rubqov sniman u crno-beloj tehnici. ãto je vidno u Stalkeru. na primer.nostalghia. Smewivawe dugaåkog kadra i brze montaæe. a dogaœaji iz tri razliåita vremenska perioda prikazana izmeãano. takoœe se mogu razumeti kao jedno poetsko sredstvo buduñi da podseñaju na poeziju. Boju je. haiku poezija.16 Teoloãki åasopis. http://www. takoœe. åak monohtromnu. Auditivni pejzaæ filma kao da postoji paralelno sa vizuelnim i kao da dolazi sa nekog drugog mesta. jambiåki pentametar. wemu veoma draga. koristio kao jako izraæajno sredstvo da prenese odreœeno raspoloæewe ili emociju. Tarkovski upotrebqava i isprekidan i nepodudaran zvuk stvarajuñi tako auru „ontoloãke neodreœenosti“: “Åini se kao da sama Priroda poåiwe åudesno da govori. Tarkovski se seña da je dvadeset puta restruktuirao film pre nego ãto ga je zavrãio. odnosno varijacije u ritmu samog filma. veñ slagawe slika u procesu asocijacija kao ãto to åine pesnici. Ipak. Uglavnom koristi ograniåenu paletu boja.com . N° 9 I u teoriji i u praksi Tarkovski je nastojao da se oslobodi logike linearnog narativa i pribliæi logici poezije. Andrea Trpin. stvarawe slike raspoloæewa i atmosfere kako je to åinila.

2008. voda (kiãa. 51-69. Crkvu odlikuju åvrsti uspravni stubovi i neæni lukovi. Kuña poseduje prozore kroz koje stanari gledaju napoqe. modernih hotela i ogoqenih hotelskih soba. Snimajuñi Nostalgiju nije æeleo da je prikaæe turistiåki kroz najlepãa mesta i predele. bare. ukazuje da wegova „upotreba dvosmislenog zvuka uvlaåi publiku u borbu. Reaktion Books. Prirodu predstavqa jednostavan tok koji upija qudski pogled.) . koja se nikad do kraja ne razreãava. potoci. veñ da da prikaz Italije kroz poglede svojih likova ãto je ukquåivalo i slike nepoznatih ruãevina. Kada je reå o prostoru Andreja Tarkovskog11. Andrei Tarkovsky: Elements of Cinema. a stranci unutra. kuña ili dom i crkva ili svetiliãte.. London.10 Takav zvuk destabilizuje. åini da ono ãto je sasvim ugodno i celovito odjednom izgleda strano i zbuwujuñe. na ivici panteizma. U wegovim filmovima dominiraju priroda. a wihovu postojanost remeti wihovo åesto neoåekivano pojavqivawe. postavi pitawe ontoloãke sigurnosti. Nikada nije samo dekorativan ili informativan.. Ipak. Svako od tih prostora se razlikuje po osobenom vizuelnom naponu koji nastaje ukrãtawem pogleda kamere sa pogledima likova i gledalaca. sneg. Time Tarkovski otvara prostor gledaocu da zaviri u numinoznu stvarnost ili bar. a ponekad se åini i da ga uzvraña. Robert Bird.je najåeãñe prikazana kao plodna i æiva. trava.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 17 na temu zvuka u filmovima Andreja Tarkovskog. moæe biti da se radi i o pravoslavnom etosu qubavi prema tvorevini kao daru Boæijem koji trpi posledice åovekovog pada i åeka da bude obnovqena u svoj svojoj lepoti u 10 11 Idem. Priroda – drveñe. on je uvek liåan jer ga oblikuje qudski pogled. . kao ãto se filmski likovi bore sa sopstvenom sposobnoãñu da imaju veru“. da li da veruju u priåu.

a svetiliãte s åuvenom Madonom del Parte na wenom poåetku. U Solarisu i Ærtvi ona je i mesto nerazreãenih porodiånih tenzija. oltar sa hlebom. crkva belih zidova koja åeka da bude oslikana. gotovo uvek prikazuje kao dañu na selu. Kasnije. priroda je zagaœena i nepredvidiva. ona kao da vidi. nakon Katasonikove smrti. a zanimqivo je da unutraãwost kuñe åesto ostaje neodrediva kao da prostorije mewaju svoj poloæaj. dolazi do izvesne promene. Rim. Åesti motivi u kuñi su åaãe. bunker u jednom trenutku podseti na crkvu tokom liturgije. plamen. tatarsko razvaqivawe ulaza u crkvu i ulazak u wu na 12 13 Poslanica Rimqanima 8. Nostalgija zavrãava kuñom u nestvarnom pejzaæu unutar katedrale. Katedrala u nadrealnom pejzaæu koji podseña na De Kirikove slike pojavquje se na kraju Nostalgije. 21. dok je u Nostalgiji i Ærtvi pomalo zapostavqena da bi se Ærtva zavrãila scenom olistavawa suvog drveta kao simbolom ispuwene nade i procvetale vere. Kolin u crkvi pali cigaretu izmeœu ostataka freske Bogorodice i razbuktalog plamena. prosuto mleko. U Ogledalu i Nostalgiji ona se javqa samo u snovima punim åeæwe za povratkom u dom.22. Kolin razbija tu atmosferu besnim zvowewem zvona. U Stalkeru. kwige. Kuñu. Tarkovski. simbolom novog æivota.18 Teoloãki åasopis. U Ivanovom detiwstvu. U Ivanovom detiwstvu Ivan ulazi na vrata u kuñu koja je skoro potpuno uniãtena kao ãto åini i Domeniko u Nostalgiji. krstovi. Andrej Rubqov obiluje predstavama crkvi. N° 9 punoñi („Jer æarkim iãåekivawem tvorevimna oåekuje da se jave sinovi Boæiji“ da bi se „oslobodila od robovawa propadqivosti“)12 Wegova priroda je gotovo slovesna. Na samom poåetku seqak Jefim i wegov skok sa vrha crkve. . razume. zvono. 8. sastradava i raduje se zajedno sa åovekom („Jer znamo da sva tvar zajedno uzdiãe i tuguje do sada“)13. åipka. a Ærtva kuñom koja nestaje u vatri.

putuju u nepoznate svetove svog unutraãweg biña. Tarkovski je smatrao da postoji analogija izmeœu potresa izazvanog umetniåkim delom i onog koje potiåe iz åisto religioznog iskustva. jedini drugi put je. a sam umetnik je. na æalost. Wegovi junaci su najåeãñe oni koji tragaju.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 19 kowima. tako da najmawe ãto åovek moæe da uradi tokom svog æivota.14 Umetnost se. raœa i utvrœuje tamo gde postoji nezasita åeæwa za duhovnim kao idealom. otuœenosti i zajedniãtva. Muåe ih pitawa vere i smisla. kako sebi tako i onima oko sebe. Ciq umetnosti je da kroz potres i katarzu uåini qudsku duãu prijemåivom za dobro i da joj priliku za jedno autentiåno duãevno iskustvo. Liãena duhovnosti umetnost odgaja u sebi svoju vlastitu tragediju. Tarkovski piãe: „Mene privlaåi åovek koji je spreman da sluæi viãem ciqu. Jer. Za Tarkovskog. „Umetnost je sredstvo pripajawa sveta åoveku. po wemu imao posebnu misiju i posebnu odgovornost. instrument wegovog saznavawa. ukquåen u putawu åovekovog kretawa prema onom ãto nazivamo apsolutnom istinom“. iskupqewa i ærtve. zaãto åovek æivi i koji je smisao wegovog postojawa. Zato je i video izvesnu religioznu dimenziju same umetnosti. ciq celokupne umetnosti je da objasni. koji ne æeli – ili åak ne moæe – da pristane na opãte prihvañenu svetsku ‘moralnost’. Umetnik mora da teæi istini i ma koliko ta istina bila straãna. padova i pokajawa. åovek koji prepoznaje da smisao qudskog postojawa leæi. stradawa i zla. åeznu za Biñem. ona ipak. a ono bar da se upita i da drugima postavi pitawe. iznad svega. za izmirewem. onaj koji vodi duhovnom 14 Andrej Tarkovski. i crkva kao mesto epifanije – Teofanovo javqawe sa onoga sveta. iscequje. u borbi protiv zla u nama samima. za istinskim postojawem. jeste da napravi bar jedan korak ka duhovnom savrãenstvu. op. po wemu. Ako ne da objasni. . cit.

... govorio je. op. ãto ga. åini autorom koji istanåano i s merom gradi duhovnu dimenziju filma. N° 9 propadawu. Umetnik je takoœe upravqen nekom vrstom nagona i wegovo delo produæava tragawe åoveka za onim ãto je veåno. cit. veru qubav..16 Kao dubok i odgovoran umetnik. po naãem miãqewu.“15 Wegovi likovi su zaokupqeni sopstvenim duhovnim krizama. rvawem sa æivotom i wegovim smislom te su tako wegovi filmovi i svojim narativom upleteni u reãavawe neizreciva tajne postojawa ulazeñi tako u prostor duhovnog i religioznog.. Za wega su svet i åovek neizrecive tajne i on svoje gledaoce. unutraãwim tragawima.. boæansko.20 Teoloãki åasopis. veñ samo nenametqivo poziva na susret i opãtewe i. transcendentno. nagon govori wegovom telu koji pokret ñe ga spasiti. åesto uprkos greãnosti samog pesnika“. one koji na taj poziv odgovore. Stil Andreja Tarkovskog religiozni diskurs ne objavquje i ne natura. Kada je neko ko ne zna da pliva baåen u vodu. Andrej Tarkovski je na ekran umeãno prenosio duboko proæivqenu istinu åovekovog postojawa u ovom svetu dotiåuñi se i wegove duhovne dimenzije. 237 . Andrej Tarkovski. sami u wu zarone i suoåe se sa sobom i sa onostranim. „Umetnost potvrœuje ono najboqe u åoveku“. op. uzvodi do samih vrata te tajne ostavqajuñi ih da poput Stalkera. Ono ãto sawa i ono åemu se nada. cit. istanåanim oseñajem za upotrebu formalnih elemenata filma i narativa. 15 16 Andrej Tarkovski. „nadu. a naãe svakodnevno iskustvo i sveopãti pritisak da se povinujemo åini izbor ovog drugog puta isuviãe lakim. uzvodi ka jednom neizrecivom i mistiånom iskustvu. molitvu. 206.

London.com . Gazing into Time: Tarkovsky and Post-Modern Cinema Aesthetics. 1989.com Tarkovski. (prireœ. David. Vajawe u vremenu. Beograd. Prometej. Andrej. Tarkovska.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 21 Citirana dela: Bird. An Attempt at Universal Subjectivity. 1999. 2008. Bird. Marina. Robert.nostalghia. Andrei Tarkovsky: Elements of Cinema. Umetniåka druæina Anonim. http://www. Wishard. Reaktion Books. Robert.). Tarkovski (prevela Vesna Tovstongov). Novi Sad.nostalghia. http://www.

22 Teoloãki åasopis. emotional expressiveness of characters and allegorical constructions (though he was often criticized as too allegorical) showing strong influence of orthodox iconography and its esthetic means. presenting the invisible without useless describing and retelling. His main effort was to catch the essence of life in all its dimensions. but on skillful use of basic elements of film. . Tarkovsky tended to free his films from the logic of linear narratives. The spiritual dimension of his films is not established on religious narrative. N° 9 Resume Andrei Tarkovsky was a director who created his films with desire to penetrate deeply into the secret of human existence and give his audience the opportunity for an authentic spiritual experience. but through subtle suggestions and hints in order to give an opportunity to his audience to make an effort to catch a glimpse of the invisible realities by themselves.

za eshatoloãku Evharistiju.01. bogoslovqa i crkvene poboænosti. tj. romantiåno – epski jezik Pravoslavqa. Univerzitet u Beogradu) (nesic. .96:252 Primljeno 19. Liturgije. otvorenosti Crkve.2010 Lazar Neãiñ. pojmova i savremenih interpretacija.2010 Prihvañeno: 23. zatvorenost za „drugaåijost“. wegovih uåewa.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 23 UDK 281.com) Savremena pastirska sluæba Crkve Rezime Priloæeni tekst predstavqa pokuãaj analize savremenog stawa „pastirske sluæbe pravoslavne Crkve“ i to pre svega iz pravoslavno – bogoslovskog i kritiåkog ugla. relevantno i aktuelno bogoslovqe Crkve. a samim tim i preutemeqenu pastirsku sluæbu Crkve. Kroz krizu savremenog pravoslavnog bogoslovqa u Srbiji i ãire. bogoslovqa kao i samih hriãñana za uvek – novog i neponovqivog Gospoda Isusa Hrista.lazar@gmail.02. zacementirana Liturgija. (Pravoslavni bogoslovski fakultet. Tekst dijagnosticira taåke u kojima se takve anomalije pojavquju: nerelevantno bogoslovqe. i daje jedan ãiroki moguñi naåin da se oni prevaziœu ili makar poånu da se prevazilaze i to pomoñu koncepta „dolazeñeg Carstva Boæijeg“. itd. do krize razdvojenosti i ãizofrenije izmeœu Liturgije.

Bogoslovqe i pastirska sluæba Crkve u XXI veku Sredstva pojmovnog miãqewa su suviãe siromaãna da bi izrazila veånu beskonaånost Emil Sioran Ãta je bogoslovqe? Ãta bi moglo da bude bogoslovqe? Da li je to skup sistema. Bogoslovqe je. Da li je bogoslovqe tu da „osigura“ naãu poboænost... moguñnost nemoguñeg. iskaza. deãava. sveta. dakle. nije samo klasiåan „govor i nauk o Boæanstvu“. veåito epikleptiåko . otkrivawe neotkrivenog. Bogoslovqe je upitanost. prizivajuñe. Bogoslovqe se zbiva. veåno – biñevno – otkrivajuñe. doæivqaja. izreka i poslovica o Bogu pothrawenih u muzejskoj zbirci Crkve koje åuåe u fasciklama na policama kabineta i åekaju da budu izvaœene u trenucima kada „ i Crkva treba da kaæe svoje“?! Ili je bogoslovqe neãto drugo. suæivota. qubavi izmeœu Svete Trojice i åoveka. niti „definicija Boga“. N° 9 1. uvek – neponovqivo sazreva. „opravdawe“ za crkvenu samoizolaciju? Ili je bogoslovqe neãto „drugo“. pokuãaj neopisivog opisa susreta. åoveka. „ortodoksnost“ naãe hriãñanske pravovernosti pred „bezboænim svetom“. opitno. uvek – iznova – okuãano. niti iãta ãto potseña na neãto dato i zavrãeno. Bogoslovqe. definicija. neãto mnogo „drugaåije“ od svega ãto smo dosada åuli o wemu?! Bogoslovqe svagda jeste opis. „ispravnost“ naãih stavova. pre svega. riziåno – bezdano. Zacementirano. . æivota. i qubav – Boæiju stalno – primajuñe. neki susret moæda? Jedno neponovqivo otkrivawe „drugosti“ Boga.24 Teoloãki åasopis. Bogoslovqe je nikad – do – kraja – ispriåana priåa o onima koji se qube. jedno integralno obuhvatawe svih åovekovih razmiãqawa. dogaœa.

jer se ono bavi Onim koji krãi zakone. Bogoslovqe nema sve odgovore na sva pitawa. ni u bogoslovqu ni u æivotu. tradicije. patriotizma. Bogoslovqe „nema gde glavu prikloniti“. bezdan neotkriveni. u samosigurnosti. Jedinom moguñnoãñu koja nam je joã ostala u savremenom svetu. Bogoslovqe je rizik.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 25 Bogoslovqe nije odgovor na „dilemu Boga“! Bogoslovqe je i samo u dugaåkom redu nauka koje „muåi Bog“. „Sveti Oci su odgovorili na sva pitawa“. moguñnost gledawa „drugih“.2 Pogreãno je uverewe o bogoslovqu kao åuvaru „Boæijih zakona“. Bogoslovqe je ono evharistijski – epikleptiåko i qubavno – åeæwivo nadajuñe – se – iãåekivawe i neumoqivi vapaj: „Doœi Gospode“!3 Bogoslovqe je uznemiravawe onog nekrofilskog. uvodi 1 Jn 1. Ali. naæalost. jer se ono time ni ne bavi. „U Pismu su svi odgovori“. tekstova. 3 Temeqno istraæivawe ranih hriãñanskih molitvi. ali i moguñnost tragiånog neodnosa sa „drugima“. Jedinom „misijom“ koju Crkva moæe danas pruæiti. itd. rizikujuñi sve do samog svog biña. ãto je danas zakon postojawa. 46 2 Treba iznova promisliti stare fraze prema kojima: „Vera ima odgovore na sva pitawa“. pruæiñe nam moæda iznenaœujuñi uvid u ovu åiwenicu prevashodnosti Dolaska Carstva nad osiguravawem druãtveno-politiåkog æivota. konvencionalnog i nominalnog „hriãñanstva“ samodovoqnog od svojih „dostignuña“.. „pravoslavnih vrednosti i obiåaja“. i to posebno kada znamo da danas i nije baã sve tako jednostavno i lako. zapisa.. „tradicije“. åekaju da vide ishod borbe bogoslovqa i Onoga koga bogoslovqe treba. mewa obiåaje. . „porodice“. Dok ostale nauke sa distance. „druãtvenih i veånih vrednosti“. itd. sa jednom velikom razlikom. Razlikom liånog qubavnog susreta! Razlikom onog Jevanœelskog: „Doœi i vidi“1. samo bogoslovqe se baca u bezdan moguñnosti.

Mora takoœe biti jasno kako produæiti ono ãto su „utemequjuñi“ tekstovi 4 Mt 5. fensi. nego kao od-smrti-izbavqenog i ne-viãe-u-smrti-okonåavajuñeg. tj. novost. molio se. ne novog kao modno-zanimqivog. kao jedan preævakani i nerealni termin u koji i sami malo verujemo. u to „rvawe sa Bogom“. 21 – 44. Ona osposobqava. neponovqivo – novo.26 Teoloãki åasopis. tj. dogaœajno – novo. kao „jednom – davno – novo“. svagda – novo. Koji gazi po smeñu logike ovog sveta4. a sve u prostoru „novog æivota“. mrtvu floskulu. ono ãto iskamo.. itd. Novina. Jn 1. ono ãto prizivamo. itd. kul. leåi.). Jedinog Novog. Bogoslovqe je zato i tragiåno. Hrista. N° 9 haos u harmoniju.. Pastirska sluæba Crkve predstavqa tek jedan „uvod“ kojim se åovek uspravqa i upuãta u taj rizik odnosa. sigurnosti i statistike (tipa: koliko sam postio. neoåekivano – novo. saborskih. davao milostiwu – toliko ñe mi se vratiti u svetu gde pobeœuje idealna bezpristrasna pravda). Ono se ne moæe sastojati samo iz „utemequjuñih tekstova“ (svetopisamskih. otaåkih. Bogoslovqe je uvek novo! Ali. Novo je ono ãto dolazi. itd. in. u Crkvi5. åemu se nadamo. ãto åekamo. Ãta zapravo znaåi „novi æivot“.ali to je tek poåetak. . novo je samo ono istinsko uvek – novo. tj. istorijskih. Bogoslovska misao zahteva otvoreni horizont tema. problema i moguñih razjaãwewa. dolazeñe – novo. jer ne pruæa farisejsku sladuwavost morala. 1 – 14 5 Ali opet. veåno – novo. jer ubija svako naãe sebence. za åim åeznemo.. trendi. to tek iznova treba promisliti i proæiveti. Koliko puta samo koristimo kovanicu „novi æivot“ kao obiånu. dakle novo kao iãåekujuñe – nadawe i stalno – prizivajuñe – primawe Onog Novog. bogosluæbenih. koliko åesto smo svedoci da dotiånu reå „novo“ shvatamo samo u hronoloãko – istorijskom kontekstu. a ne kao „svagda – neponovqivo – novo“.

hermeneutika uniãtewa smrti. askezom. u naãem sebiånom xepu. ma koliko dobra i koristna bila. s druge strane? Da li takvo bogoslovqe polako eutanizira savremeno hriãñanstvo?) Bogoslovqe je hermeneutika susreta izmeœu Svete Trojice i Åoveka. Da li se analogno isto to deãava i onom bogoslovqu koje nema snage da svari „teæinu i ozbiqnost“. Imajmo u vidu da ni sami sveti oci nisu odgovorili na sva pitawa!!! . kovawem novih reåi.. ali koja se dobro „ne vari“. otaåke proãlosti. buduñi uvek nepotpuno – prisutno i iznova – oprisutnujuñe. Poloæiti svoju nadu jedino u ispravnost istorijskih tekstova na kojima poåiva danaãwe hriãñanstvo. æivim susretom. tekstova. buduñi da se u – nesigurnosti 6 Npr. „predawima“. Samo iz tog Tamo – eshatoloãkog mi ga moæemo prizvati. „obiåajima i starim praksama“. Bogoslovqe nije samo „tumaåewe“ Svetih Otaca. Ono nas liãava samodopadne sigurnosti. starih hriãñanskih tekstualnih svedoåanstva. praviti. Bivajuñi uvek Tamo. viãe je nego opasno. ne funkcioniãe. idr. Mestu koje je Carstvo Boæije. Mestu koje je Tamo. Evharistijom. udomqeno na Drugom Mestu. Zato ona treba da bude osloboœena svakog kopirawa u korist interpretacije. ustvari postaje pravi otrov za telo i polako ga usmrñuje. Mestu koje se neprestano – gradi i Koje iznova ikoniãe i ono ãto zovemo Crkva. ne prima. iskustvom. u ãta se zapravo danas åesto pretvara kao u jedno „areheologisawe“ po tekstualnim iskopinama slavne. i to one liåno – hermeneutiåke. itd. ono nas na jedan divan i smireni naåin liãava moguñnosti da ga dræimo u nekim naãim „riznicama bogoslovqa“. muåeniãtvom. Pisma. ali daleke. Bogoslovqe je uvek Tamo. Mestu koje je nadnacionalno i nadteritorijalno.. tj. ujeziåavati.. na polici sebequbqa kao kakav lek protiv neistomiãqenika. a pritom nemati potrebu za prizivajuñim – oæivaqavawem istih. æivotnost. (Poznato je da hrana.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 27 uåinili6. s jedne strane i tragiku savremenog æivota. Ono nas liãava uspavanosti. itd.

dijaloga. Mesto zajedniåkog spaãavawa sveta i biña od smrti. To je Mesto razgovora. osluãkivawa. forsirawem „pravoslavnog naåina æivota“ (!) „zaobiœemo“ susret sa Drugim. tj. Setimo se samo o. 1998: 45 9 . Evharistija i bogoslovqe u taj ‘naåin æivota’ unose probleme. to je parodija istine. nije åak ni zanimqiva misao. ono Drugo. nepokajawem. ono Neoåekivano. tj. neãto od åega bi morali da mewamo naãu zacementiranu ispravnost. Neliturgijsko bogoslovqe. plaãeñi se da ñe nam moæda saopãtiti neãto neoåekivano.. poredak. tj. postom. onaj Dogaœaj Dolaska Drugog koji jedini moæe da ga donese Ovde. 7 8 Pokajawem. 384). borbu-oni sve vreme ugroæavaju statiånost ‘naåina æivota’ (citat preuzet iz: Naã æivot u Hristu. N° 9 – vapi za wim i u – besmislu – svakodnevnice – traæi ono Tamo. najistinitijeg sjediwewa sa Wim.. tragizam. tragawe. „jeretiåno“ åak. mesto koje poraœa novo biñe æivota. Liturgija je najprirodnije Mesto na kome i u kome se odigrava Dogaœaj Dolazak Drugog. molitvom. æivota koji se „pre groba veñ nalazi u Vaskrsewu9“. Mesto izbavqewa prostora i vremena od veånog neprisustva biña. u Liturgiju. nespremnoãñu. najæivotnijeg. æivotom qubavi i ærtve. savetovawa. Mesto na kome je „sve neãto drugo“. Hristov æivot u nama. str. Priåeãña. od onog straãnog iskustva neprisutnosti Drugog. pre svega u Dogaœaju najerosnijeg.Aleksandra Ãmemana: „ Jer Sveta Tajna jeste eshatoloãka i kao takva se ne uklapa u ‘naåine æivota’.28 Teoloãki åasopis. svim onim ãto zovemo askeza ili podvig. u koje åesto upadamo8. Lestviånik. najbitnijeg. zapitanosti. Bogoslovqe se „mesi“7 i unosi tamo gde mu je i mesto. gresima. Pokuãavajuñi da pravdawima. u Crkvu i za Crkvu i Crkvi. zakone i „pravoslavnost naãeg naåina æivota“.

Deridina teorija dara kao da nastoji da se pribliæi tajni Hristove ærtve. Da blagodarimo. Bogoslovqe je blagodarewe. proæeta. takoœe apsolutnog dara.prisutno neponovqivo – neoåekivano . i onim istim „Dolaskom Jedinog 10 Æak Derida ( Jacques Derrida ) ñe opisati ekonomiju dara kao naåin razmene gde se namiruje raåun: dar je uistinu dar onda kada se poklawa bez oåekivawa da se uzvrati. tj.sada ali ne . koji dolazeñi – donosi. da me vrate u æivot. EKV Sva naãa promiãqawa u ovom poglavqu. daruje. Æivota koji Dolazi. ono „Drugo“. biñe nadahnuta. hermeneutiãu? 2. ãta sve ove reåi i izrazi nama danas znaåe? Ãta åoveku 21.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 29 Bogoslovqe je. koji neprestano iznova Dolazi.sasvim Ovde. . i bez duga koji prethodi. saopãtavaju. samo obiåne reåi. Ali.. ili dara bez kalkulacije. iznenaœuje davawem. kao i celini rada. Novi i neprestani Dar qubavi i slobode kojim se grobovi prazne od smrti. Blagodarewe Onome Kome mi jedino to i moæemo. Trpeza Carstva koje je veñ . „Nova Tvar“. veka one govore.oprisutwewe „slatke“ Hrane i Piña besmrtnosti. Darovawe buduñeg æivota. takoœe i Dar10. Novo Jelo i novo Piñe. osmiãqena „otvorenoãñu Dolazeñeg Carstva Boæijeg“. buduñi do Dolaska Drugog Tamo kao veñ . bivajuñi liturgijsko i epikleptiåko..Kriza pojmova – kritiåki pristup nadahnut „personalistiåkom ontologijom“ Nisu dovoqne reåi. poklawa.

Carstvo Boæije.30 Teoloãki åasopis. Ovo je naã hermeneutiåki kquå kojim pokuãavamo da otvorimo vrata problema. æeqa za ãto „monaãkijim i manastirskijim“ naåinima åekawa Dolaska 11 Sjajna studija za razmatrawe ovog problema: Stilijan Papadopulos. danas Gospod Isus Hristos. seña li se neko joã ãta je to Sveta Trojica? Ãta nama danas znaåe Crkva. nerazdeqivost prirode. otaåkog. logosi biña. npr: • Stari pojmovi priliåe vremenu kada su nastali: Kako objasniti sebi i svetu pojmove poput: jednosuãtnost. idioma i ostalog? Jesu li ovo samo stare reåi. ãta danas znaåi reå Bog. imena. za nas. kenoza. Donoseñeg -Neoåekivanog i Buduñeg. imenica. 1998. N° 9 Novog i Drugog. æivot veåni. predawskog. Jedinorodni. tj. crkvena terminologija iz proãlosti vredna areheoloãkog prouåavawa. reåi. ipostas. Takoœe. prvo da „izvadi brvno iz oka svoga“. pa tek onda da ukaæe na brvna i u ostalim oåima. Hriãñanska misao. i ostale „temeqne“ pojmove hriãñanskog uåewa? • Usahle forme crkvenog æivota ne mogu se analagno lepiti na savremenost: Æeqa za ãto autentiånijim æivqewem ranog. Teologija i Jezik. . mora da bude iskrena sama sa sobom i u najboqem asketsko – otaåkom i jevanœelskom duhu. pravoslavnog hriãñansva je viãe nego za pohvalu. molitva. spasewe. Dolazeñeg. Ko je. duhovnost. post. stvarawe sveta iz niåega. Bogoslovqe je previãe zarobqeno u svoj istorijski jezik. naziva. Pogledajmo kakav je jezik bogoslovqa danas11. ikonomija. podvig? Ãta nama predstavqa åitava enciklopedija hriãñanskih termina. Evharistija. naåin postojawa. ali samo pod uslovom onog veñ mnogo puta ovde ponovqenog „osmiãqavajuñeg – prizivawa“ Novog. Vaskrsewe. naivne bajke? Ãta moæe savremena pastirska sluæba Crkve danas sa svim ovim hitnim pitawima? Pre svega. Hrista“. Beograd.

koncertne dvorane. dehumanizacije u nauci. „druãtveno – politiåki – prilagodqivo“. a posebno sa onim sasvim Drugim. i to onim mestima gde se govori o neidentitetu i nerelevantnosti savremenog hriãñanstva ( iz ovih misli pravoslavni bi mnogo mogli da nauåe). 2008. nakaznosti åovekove svakodnevnice. ipak. muzeje. tj. tj. ) . idr.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 31 Hristovog takoœe moæe imati svoju zdravu primenu samo pod uslovima da „nekako“ iznaœemo naåina da ceo svet strpamo u manastire i peñine. Strah od sveta. ono ipak danas ne moæe da bude primarno. isti je onom strahu od susreta sa drugim – bliæwim. mrtvo!12 Hrabro suoåavawe sa rugobama ovog sveta tek predstoji. Rijeka. eshatologijom. Do tada. problema. Iako je istraæivawe starih problema neophodno. „religijsko“. odnosno tamo gde je ono „neproblematiåno“. mi zapadamo u oåitu nerelevantnost pred svetom. tj. vode bogoslovqe. police. „zanimqivo“. „Boæijom pravdom i promislom“ i zatvarawem u iste (jer se u takvim apstrakcijima jedino oseña sigurnim). • Problemi sa kojima se bogoslovqe suoåava su bezvremeni i nerelevantni danas: Veñ pomenuto bavqewe „istorijom bogoslovqa“ tj. Strah bogoslovqa da se suoåi sa savremenim „bezboænostima“ pod izgovorom romantiånog bavqewa evharistijom. biñe dovoqni i naåini da se u qudsku i æivotnu svakodnevnicu udahne sveæ vazduh Onoga Koji „diãe gde hoñe“. 12 . za obiåan svet koji ostaje van tog supermen molitvenog prostora. Hristom. galerije. problemima koji su nekada davno bili aktuelni i vaœewem istih na povrãinu savremenosti. „umetniåko – vrednosno“. „istoriåno – nacionalno“. U hriãñansko – Iako postoji obiqe literature za ovaj problem. bacaju ga u fioke. mi smo posebnu paæwu poklonili mislima zapadnog teologa Jirgena Moltmana ( Jurgen Moltmann ) u wegovoj åuvenoj kwizi „Raspeti Bog“ ( Ex Libris.

samo jedna „istorija teologije“ tj. u stvari.32 Teoloãki åasopis. jedan muzejski eksponat kome se jedni dive. 2008. 13 Za pojam „traga“ u savremenoj filosofiji videti: Æak Derida. svetu odvija se u okviru nekada – davnog – arhaiånog jezika. Sarajevo. ali obostrano åuvaju daleko od stvarnog æivota. jezika koji – ne – dopire – dodrugog Tek ovaj problem iziskuje jednu celu studiju. za koju naæalost ovde nemamo prostora. terminologije i problema. Ona je. tj. Veselin Masleãa. . drugi ga preziru. koje se nalazi „pre licem sveta“ najåeãñe je: • Onaj – koji – viãe – ne – dotiåe – svet • Onaj – koji – u – istoriji – prebiva • Zakopan – u – riznici – señawa • Onaj – koji – se – samo – seña – davnine • Sahrawen – u – kwigama • Zatrpan objektivacijama • Romantiåno – bajkovit • Epski – naivan Malo je prostora na kome bismo daqe mogli razraœivati ove postavke. tj. danas. samo jedan „objekt“ u rukama areheologa teologije. ali jedno je sigurno: jezik bogoslovqa u krizi prebiva. N° 9 pravoslavnom taboru takvog viteza – borca joã uvek åekamo da se pojavi. Ãahin Paãiñ. Pisawe i razlika. arheoloãka iskopina koja u sebi åuva tek samo trag13 nekadaãweg – davnog odnosa sa Bogom. tj. • Govor o Bogu. Sarajevo. åoveku. Jezik savremenog bogoslovqa. jedna recipirana istorija teologisawa. istorija razvoja teoloãke misli. Naãe bogoslovqe je. O gramatologiji. . ali i hriãñanstva.

podviga. moliti se i postiti. itd.10. 2008: 5 . svetu „posle Auãvica17“?! Bogoslovqe stalno prebiva u opasnosti od eshatoloãko – evharistijskog utopizma. Sluæiti Liturgiju. ima prizvuk nelagodnosti u svetu zalivenog nihilizmom. 39) 18 . i ostale „duhovne“ radwe åiniti. 1999. danas. Naivno shvañenog kao: „mi sluæimo Liturgiju“ i „molitve i posta“. ozbiqnosti. bez aktivne qubavi prema Hristu. glavni je predstavnik ove misli. 15 Œani Vatimo (Giani Vattimo). rada. ali ne –joã . kao kretajuñe – se – ka – nama. dovode nas u pitawe pred reåima Hristovim: „O eurwn thn yuchn auton apolesei autin. italijanski filosof i teoretiåar. odsustva smisla. Upravo kao veñ – sada . kretawem. Svetu i bliæwem. kao stalno – dolazeñe. 16 17 Œorœo Agamben ( Giorgio Agamben ). Xon Kaputo (John Caputo). liãavajuñi sadaãwost dinamike. nemoñi. New York. eshatoloãko – evharistijsko bogoslovqe samim svojim naporom. pokreñe iznova ovu temu u svojoj najnovijoj kwizi: “ The Weakness of God – Theology of Event”. Indiana University Press. kao osmiãqavajuñi – od –Tamo – nas – Ovde.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 33 Bogoslovqe. videti u: Kopiñ. i to u ovom svetu post – metafizike14 na temeqima slabe ontologije15 i Boæije slabosti16. odgovornosti. 2008. dotiåe se ovih tema u svom genijalnom radu “Remnants of Auschwitz”.18 Setimo se da svaka utopija tovari obaveze na buduñnost. Zone Books. italijanski filozof i profesor na Torinskom univerzitetu. dolazi i naãe preispitivawe: „Åemu joã bogoslovqe“?. ameriåki filosof religije. Na staro pitawe: „Åemu joã filosofija“?. izvijawem napred i naviãe (dakle kao svo u kretawu i 14 Reå-kovanica za åitav jedan sistem åovekove misli posle objave „smrti Boga“. kai apolesas thn yuchn autou eneken emou eurnsei authn “ (Mt 10.

slikarstvo. idr. Hrista. gledawe. O Teopoetici viãe videti na internet prezentaciji: http://theopoetics. ona ostaje izvorno svetopisamska.net/.ali ne u smislu ponovne pojmovno – logiåke ograniåenosti i nemoguñnosti za izraæavawe onog liåno – qubavnog. poput: susret. npr. nemajuñi „dah novog æivota“. 1984: 5. Poznate i razumqivo – shvatqive (srcu prijemåqive i umu osvetqavajuñe) reåi. jer predstavqa pokuãaj onog istog neizrecivog iskaza i opisa susreta Svete Trojice i Åoveka. i mi pravoslavni ne smemo hladno zaobiñi postojawe jedne takve zanimqive i originalne misli.. ali u okvirima svima-razumqivog i saopãtivog jezika svakodnevnog i sveopãteg qudskog æivota i iskustva. veñ jedan jezik svakodnevnice. dodir. 19 Ratzinger. kwiæevnost. crkvena. qubqewe. tj. a to je opet i opet susret Svete Trojice i Åoveka20. Bogoslovqe se. mogu ponovo pronañi mesta u opisu onog dogaœaja o kome bogoslovqe blagovesti. film. jedan jezik – susret. ovde preobraæene. polako pretvara ( ili se veñ pretvorilo? ) u jezik nemuãtih bogoslovskih unutraãwih trvewa. ispuwene i ujeziåene dogaœajem dolaska Drugog.34 Teoloãki åasopis. Iako svoje izvore crpi u drugim oblastima qudskog stvaralaãtva. unapred åuva sebe od pasivno – nepokretne neistine romantiåarskog eshatoloãko evharistijskog utopizma. dakle. u kojoj taj isti jezik postaje mrtav za svoju svetu – se – obrañati upotrebu. tj. muzika. ne smemo zaboraviti ni kolosalnu misao rimokatoliåkog teologa Hans Urs von . N° 9 razrastawu). S druge strane. hriãñanska. itd. Teopoetika je i nama danas poziv na jedno takvo saopãtavawe sebe svetu.19 Da li bogoslovqe zato potrebuje jedan novi jezik. poezija. zagrqaj. moæe biti pokret hriãñanske teologije na Zapadu. 20 Veoma zanimqiva misao za pravoslavno bogoslovqe danas. pretvara se u jedan „klovnovski jezik“.. nazvan Teopoetika (Theopoethics). moæda jedan meta – jezik?. sasvim Drugog.

on se gradi.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 35 Na mesto „mrtvog jezika“ treba doñi „jezik susreta“. ili u ãta sve bogoslovqe moæe da se pretvori. a ne zaokruæuje istinu. Hrista. monolog bogoslovskog jezika je smrt istog. Svete Trojice i onog bez – ontoloãkog – temeqa – trenutno – ovde – prisutnog. na misao savremenih bogoslova Crkve. Wegova prava upotreba æivi jedino u tom dogaœaju. .. u ãta sve moæe da mutira i pseudomorfira (kada ono nije obasjano svetlom autentiånosti pomenutog). dolazimo do neizbeæne åiwenice i pitawa ãta sve od toga bogoslovqe nije. da ga odvede u krizu? Oslawajuñi se. Koji donoseñi konstituiãe za moguñnost razgovora. on nastaje u osluãkivawu Duha koji dolazi. Ja Crkve je potpuno „bezjeziåno“ bez Ti Drugog. koje Ja ima tek sa Ti. Taj jezik mora iznova da najavquje. tj. on ne postoji pre susreta. i samim tim dovede do jednog diskutabilnog naåina æivota u savremenoj crkvenosti. s jedne strane. 3. tj. i pokuãaja da daqe razradimo probleme koje smo gore naveli. Bogoslovqe je jedno jeziåko pounutrewe opisa susreta izmeœu Onog sasvim Drugog. jezik koji ne postoji van Drugog.. Teodrame (Theodramatik) i Teoloãke estetike (Theologische Ästhetik). poput Aleksandra Ãmemana (delimiåno se Baltazara (Hans Urs von Balthasar) i wegov projekat Teologike (Theologik).Kriza crkvenog æivota (kratak pregled) U pokuãaju da odgovorimo na teãko pitawe ãta bi sve bogoslovqe moglo da bude (u svetlu autentiånog crkvenog. tj. evharistijskog i qubavno – slobodnog hriãñanskog æivota koji „zastupa“ personalistiåka ontologija). Jezik bogoslovqa je jezik dijaloga. u tom deãavawu. tj. tj. Åoveka.

veñ da ga uz pomoñ pomenute „otvorenosti Dolazeñeg Carstva Boæijeg“ joã viãe proãirimo. tj. Georgorija Florovskog. bogoslovqe danas teãko dopire do uãiju sveta. 2008: 21. a) Bogoslovqe – Liturgija – Poboænost Na predhodnim stranama smo pouãali da osvetlimo problem onoga ãto smo nazvali „ãta bi sve bogoslovqe moglo da bude“. Pre svega. Majendorfa. savremenog druãtva. naravno ne pretendujuñi da zaokruæimo sistem i zakquåimo problem. jedna od najtragiånijih posledica krize jeste organsko razdvajawe bogoslovqa od evharistije i poboænosti. I ne samo to. kako. Ali. promislimo. iznutra doæivimo i shvatimo.. Afanasjeva. i to najviãe iz liånog iskustva. a s druge na samo liåno iskustvo naãeg parohijskog crkvenog æivota. idr. rastegnemo. 22 Radovi savremenih nam bogoslova: G. izbegavajuñi preteranu samodopadnost i kritiku. N. Pre svega. Florovskog. o tome je veñ mnogo toga reåeno. . nama je interesantan problem „neaktuelnosti bogoslovqa za savremeni svet“. A. Hristosa Janarasa. J. Rekli smo veñ da zarobqeno u svoj arhaiåni jezik. od Crkve kao „zajednice svetih i zajednice u svetiwi“21. H. razmatrano i moæe se nañi u mnogobrojnoj literaturi koja je svima dostupna22. Åoveka. kada. Mi æelimo da proãirimo vidik ovog problema. Janarasa.36 Teoloãki åasopis. napisano. i dr. Ãmemana. pritom åvrsto se dræeñi smernica i puteva ãto su ih savremeni pravoslavni bogoslovi (a posebno ovde aktuelna „personalistiåka ontologija“ mitropolita Zizjulasa ) odredili i dijagnosticirali. N° 9 koristeñi wegovom razradom problema u okvirima ãeme Liturgija – Bogoslovqe – Poboænost). pokuãañemo da dijagnosticiramo gde. Ovde ñemo postaviti 21 Ãmeman. Iz tog ugla moæemo i uoåiti wegove danaãwe nedostatke. Joã tragiånije i paradoksalnije je ãto ono ne dopire ni do uãiju samih „bogoslova“ i hriãñana. i ko je uzroånik krize.

Bog. ikonama. qubav. smirewe. Sveta Trojica. svrhu. istinitijeg i veñeg izvora bogoslovstvovawa od samog æivota neke liånosti i same Crkve i problema koje æivot donosi pred æivot svake liånosti posebno. vaskrsewe. a koliko u æivom sustretu. askeza. qubavnom. post. posebno od evharistije kao „glavnog izvora“23. kao: spasewe. Odvojeno od svojih izvora. ãta sa sobom danas nose? Da li i daqe imaju svoju samorazumqivu. Crkva. igumana manastira Iviron. itd. bogoslova i pesnika æivota i erosa prema Svetoj Trojici i monaãko – asketska figura oca Vasilija Gondikakisa. predawima. predstavqa laiåko bogoslovska liånost i misao poznatog Hristosa Janarasa. åak i na strani „evharistijsko eshatoloãkih“ bogoslova. sloboda. svimapoznatu. I joã: koliko moæemo susresti Svetu Trojicu u kwigama. nada. o zanemarivawu SAMOG ÆIVOTA HRIÃÑANINA kao glavnom izvoru za bogoslovqe. a o kojoj skoro da nema pomena u savremenoj pravoslavnoj bogoslovskoj misli. veñ su oni postali ispraæweni u sebi samima. krajwem! Izuzetak. smisao? Naã odgovor je: ne. Veñ smo se pitali ãta danas savremenom åoveku i hriãñaninu znaåe tradicionalni temeqni pojmovi bogoslovqa. spisima. ãta oni govore. Da pogledamo malo bliæe ovaj problem. tekstovima. 2008: 511 – 519. sve zahvaqujuñi tome ãto ne postoji 23 24 Isto. Åudna je åiwenica. ontologija.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 37 jednu „opasnu“ tezu o ispraæwewu pojmova i sadræaja bogoslovqa. konvencionalnu. pak. odvojeno od æivota (kao moæda i „najglavnijeg izvora“24 ) bogoslovqe se polako prazni od svojih sadræaja koji poåivaju u wegovim pojmovima. pravoslavqe. „tumaåewima“. istinsku punoñu. duhovnost. vera. postajuñi glavna „inspiracija“ za susret sa Svetom Trojicom. liånost. na Svetoj Gori Atonskoj! . Hristos.. Pitamo se: ima li znaåajnijeg. molitva. „stvarnom“. nemaju! I to ne samo u svojoj recipiranosti od strane onih koji primaju i prihvataju te pojmove. erosnom.

jedino isti ti hriãñani mogu ponovo oæiveti svoje pojmove i uåiniti ih razumqivim i spasavajuñim. stvari su joã teæe sa klasiåno hriãñanskim pojmovima. Nije dovoqno reñi samo: „Bog“ i oåekivati saglasnost svih oko ovog „termina“. Neshvatawem i neæivqewem istinskog smisla koju pojmovi imaju u sebi26. usled svoje „greãnosti i sekularizovanosti“ neñe da åuje za hriãñanstvo. oni ne samo da postaju neaktuelni. Mada. postoji mnoãtvo religija koje se pozivaju na pravoverno tumaåewe istog. ili kao nacional – institucija – åuvar.. ili u najboqem sluåaju kao joã jedna grupa koja se „bavi duhovnoãñu“. darovi! Odvojeni od Spasiteqa. ali Koji potrebuje naã priziv. razumevawa. danas reå „Crkva“ veñini zvuåi ili kao druãtveno – humanitarno . odnoãewa ka svetu i ka sebi samima. u ovaj naã æivot. naravno. Tako. N° 9 neka zasebna „ontologija pojmova“25 nezavisno od liånosti i zajednice koje ih razumeju i daju im smisao i semantiåko znaåewe. 1998: 53. Ãta tek reñi za pojmove: spasewe. veñ postaju mrtvi! Dolazimo do uvida da. oni se pretvaraju u znakove – tragove iza kojih zjapi praznina od ispraæwenosti smisla i naznaåewa. 26 Kao oni koji iako jednom definisani nikada nisu zacementirani. naã dvig ka Wemu. Ali. nije samo „svet“ onaj koji. dakle. . naãe æivqewe.. od Duha i od Darodavca istih. duhovnost. jer. nerecipirani i nerazumqivi.38 Teoloãki åasopis. åak i oni „van Crkve“ mogu nas mnogo nauåiti tome. S druge strane. oni su danas postali autonomni i samodovoqni pamfleti kojima hriãñani neuspeãno pokuãavaju da predstave svoj identitet i 25 Papadopulos.biznis institucija. Tako. veñ uvek otvoreni za „dogaœaj dolaska Drugog“ u naãu aktuelnost i savremenost. veñ da su sami hriãñani „ubili“ svoje sopstvene znakove sporazumevawa. priznajemo sa æaqewem. u ovom sluåaju savremenih qudi i hriãñana. takav kakav je i nijedan drugi.

hiperrealno posto27 Za ovu tvrdwu namerno ne navodimo nikakvu referencu. maske. „starinama“. poboænosti. kakav æivot svetu i åoveku moæe ponuditi jedno razcrkvqeno bogoslovqe. Problem jezika bogosluæewa nemamo hrabrosti ni da zapoåenemo. ili bivajuñi izvor istog. a svi zajedno odvojeni od æivota. marame i ãamije. ili neãto tako sliåno. pokuãavajuñi s tim da poveæemo problem bogoslovqa. liturgije. „obiåajima“. tako i mrtvoj poboænosti prete iste nepogode. . U suãtini. kakvu stvarnost. imitacija æivog æivota Crkve. Kao i mrtvom bogoslovqu. „askezama“. jer nam je ona najoåiglednija u aktuelnom æivotu naãe pomesne Crkve i wenih parohija. jedna bezbogoslovska liturgija i jedna neevharistijska poboænost (s tim da su meœusobne varijante istih bezbrojne)? Laænu reå. bogosluæewe se pretvara u pojavu koju ovako definiãemo: sentimentalno señawe na davne dogaœaje iz æivota Hristovog. Neaktuelnost. to sve dotiåe i crkvenu poboænost kao izraz bogoslovqa i bogosluæewa. gluma. „spasiti se“ najåeãñe sa sobom ima druãtveno – ekonomsku ili „spasiti – se . Problemi koji se javqaju u „naåinima“ sluæewa. tj. posledica su ove razdvojenosti. Mi upuñujemo na joã ãire posmatrawe problema. Za proseånog hriãñanina. uzdasi. tj. Ali o tome je joã davno mnogo reåeno. naivnost. ne moæemo prenebregnuti problem svojevrsne „poboænosti“ koja se raœa u trenucima kada neevharistijsko bogoslovqe preokupira naãu paæwu i naãe poboæne postupke. Naravno. S tim povezan i uslovqen jeste problem liturgije. Ipak. Imajuñi pred sobom „krizirajuñe“ bogoslovqe. „praksama“. Kakvu reå. Problema koji se javqaju u obzorju smrti åoveåije i wegove prolaznosti. mrtvu stvarnost. bogosluæewe i poboænost su odvojeni od bogoslovqa i obrnuto.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 39 svoju posebnost u odnosu na druge27. kakvu autentiånost. bezidentitetnost.od – muåewa – u – paklu“ konotaciju. teatralnost. bogosluæewa uopãte kao „dela naroda“.

Hrista i zajednice „prizivajuñih – Drugog“ tj. koje ñe imati stvarnu vezu sa naãim æivotima. mogli bismo se dotañi joã mnoãtva velikih i malih problema koji uznemiravaju savremeni crkveni æivot. pravila. 28 Zizjulas. Æivota koji je odvojen od „dogaœaja dolaska Drugog i Drugaåijeg“. hriãñana. iskustveni. neshvatawa blage vesti Jevanœeqa. itd. preævakavawa starih floskula. . obiåaja. ali to i nije tema ovog rada. evharistijska poboænost. tj. tj. evharistijska liturgija. oni postaju iznova aktuelni. mræwa. „pravoslavnih etika“. b) Osvrt na ostale probleme Naravno. za dogaœaj qubavi izmeœu Hrista i Wegove Crkve. saborni. Tako i samo tako. jeziåkih oblikovawa. ali mrtvih eksponata. mrtvilo mrtvosti. evharistijsko bogoslovqe. samim tim i zatvoren.æivota – Donositeqa. Izvor takvog æivog bogoslovqa. na tom Mestu. Samo Tu. samo Tu moæe biti jezika o jeziku aktuelnosti. iskuãewa. moæe biti govora o govoru dolazeñeg. Ko ñe nas izbaviti od smrti ove? Daqe neñemo iñi.Drugog“tj. samo Tu moæe biti pojmova o pojmovima istinskog.40 Teoloãki åasopis. liturgije i poboænosti jeste sam æivot Crkve. 2004: 34. kao Mesta na kome Jedan postaje mnogi i mnogi postaju Jedan28 i Crkve kao zajednice „dolazeñeg . æivi. To su plodovi ove krize savremenog crkvenog æivota. pored reåenog. sa svim svojim sivilom svakodnevnice tragedija. trvewa. bogoslovqe. tj. umirawa. onih qudi i hriãñana koji odriåuñi se svakog olakog definisawa. Odvojeno od svog prirodnog Mesta. Æivota koji je smrt od poåetka do kraja. Evharistije. za dogaœaj veånog æivota. sam obiåan æivot svakodnevnice Crkve. zakona. uãivawem u mrtve kalupe æivota. liturgija i poboænost umiru i postaju samo jedni od fosila u muzejskoj zbirci interesantnih. ostvaruje sebe i svoj æivot kao æivot Crkve za dogaœaj neoåekivanog – smisla – i . N° 9 jawe. znawa.

mnogo je nejasno. insistirawe na krajwostima ãto mogu da nastanu iz neadekvatnog shvatawa ãta znaåe reåi „evharistijski“ i „eshatoloãki“. „eshatologije“. jeste. Relevantnosti. moæda? Mræwa? A ostalo? Jel’ to pravoslavqe? Za mnoge. Puteva kojima se oni kreñu. a takoœe i za liturgijske sitnice oko pitawa pokreta. Mnoge se pojave proglaãavaju pravoslavnim. koji je jedan te isti æivot Crkve. a pritom nemaju nikakvih suãtinskih veza sa pravoslavqem kao „iskustvom susreta Svete Trojice i Åoveka“. na æalost. naroåito kod epigona jednog takvog utopizma. krstonosnim i muånim izazovom problema koji se nalaze unutar Crkve. laika. tj. ko to sme danas da pita? Danas kada se åini da niãta nije jasnije od toga. Osmiãqavaju æivot svoj. koji je najåeãñe daleko od takvih „izmiãqenih problema“ koje utopijski bogoslovi hoñe da nametnu. pak. Problemi identiteta istih. pred nama stoje problemi klira. da li je to pravoslavqe? A ekspanzionistiåki ãovinizam? Homofobija. Ipak. „buduñnosti“. Nacionalizam. kao jednog od temeqa bogoslovqa i iskustva Crkve. Kako prosuditi sva izvitoperewa koja se javqaju u onome ãto mi zovemo „pravoslavqe“? Pravoslavqe. Wihovi. Poseban problem predstavqa pojava onog ãto smo napred nazvali „evharistijsko – eshatoloãki utopizam“. postaje danas ne mali problem. Zanemarivawe Svetog Pisma Crkve. ovi epigoni zanemaruju probleme Crkve koji su problemi ovog – ovde svakodnevnog æivota. bolesti odvajawa i razdvajawa bogoslovqa – liturgije – poboænosti. bolesti u kojoj virus „neåeæwe za Drugim Dolazeñim“ uniãtava sve. . posebno Novog Zaveta. to je samo joã jedan posledica one bolesti napred formulisane. zanemarivawem onoga ãto Crkva „kao zajednica buduñnosti“ jeste. antagonisti s druge strane. ãta je to? Ali. monaha i wihove svojevrsne teoretske i stvarne razdvojenosti. Brinuñi se samo za „ontologije“.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 41 Spomenimo samo to da crkveno i hriãñansko bogoslovqe stoji pred teãkim. ali i unutar sveta. Nama nije jasno. U stvari. Takoœe. izraza i izvoœewa bogosluæewa.

. osoqavawe. i to ñe. dok Dolazeñi ne doœe. problemi. tj. ali opet promaãujuñi istinski smisao Crkve. koja je uvek saborna.42 Teoloãki åasopis. Traæi. otvarawe. Problem Crkve i politike. problemi. Åeka. 29 Potrebno je iznova. osmiãqavawe. Oåekuje. tj. to je prevelika tema za ovaj premali prostor. o opasnosti wene otrgnutosti od smisla prave crkvene katiheze. promisliti mesto veronauke kao joã jednog od „predmeta“ u sistemu dræavnog obrazovawa (deduktivno – racionalistiåkog. razmekãavawe. Problem ekumenizma. makar malo. uvek liturgijska. itd. za poåetak. veronauke u ãkolama29. do iznemoglosti. Bioetiåki problemi i iskuãewa tehnologije i kibernetike. tj. sa trezvenoãñu. Strepi. Svetlo „personalistiåke ontologije“ mitropolita Zizjulasa moæe zasvetliti. neiskustvenog). biti dovoqno. borbe za mesto u druãtvu. kao „znaka Carstva Boæijeg“. Problem katiheze. Nada se. . Ostaje joã gomila problema pred kojim Crkva stoji. Vapi za Onim koji jedini moæe „doneti“ problemima otvarawe. uvek zajedniåka. Ali samo ako bude daqi podstrek za joã jaåe traæewe. iãåekivawe. N° 9 istiåu nedostatak aktivizma. tj. Ali. Problemi. evharistijska i na-zajednicu-dolazeñegCarstva-upuñujuña. Problemi dehumanizacije.

Kopiñ. Ratzinger. Caputo. Joseph 1984. Ãmeman. Chicago: Indiana University Press.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 43 BIBLIOGRAFIJA Zizjulas. Stilijan 1998. . Zagreb: Krãñanska misao. Sveta Gora Atonska: Hilandar. John 2008. Aleksandar 2008. Pisanje i razlika. Rijeka: Ex Libris.The Theology of Event. Raspeti Bog. Derrida. Evharistija i Carstvo Boæije. Sremski Karlovci: Kwiæarnica Zorana Stojanoviña. Uvod u krãñanstvo. Teologija i jezik. Novi Sad: Beseda. Beograd: Hriãñanska misao. Moltmann. Naã æivot u Hristu. Papadopulos. Izazovi post – metafizike. Jurgen 2008. Lestviånik. Jovan 1998. The Weakness of God . Mario 2008. Beograd: Obraz svetaåki. Jovan 2004. Sarajevo: Ãahin – Paãiñ. Jaques 2004. Hristov æivot u nama.

u ovom radu je naglasak na istraæivawu simbolizma pojedinaånih likovnih elemenata (boje.2010 Goce Delåeva 8. Naroåito je vaæan dogaœaj u kome apostoli govore razliåitim jezicima i razumeju se meœusobno. geometrije.rs Simbolizam praznika pedesetnica: pisani i slikani izvori Rezime U ovom radu ñe se govoriti o simbolici hriãñanskog praznika Pedesetnica. i svakome daje posebne darove. Sveti Duh. ikona. S obzirom na to da je kroz istoriju hriãñanstva slika imala. kolebqivu ali veoma vaænu ulogu u prenoãewu Predawa. koji se javqa kroz delovawe Svetog Duha. Primljeno: 21. simbolizam. . 11 070 Novi Beograd Originalni nauåni rad vcvetkovska-ocokoljic@megatrend.2010 Megatrend univerzitet Prihvañeno: 18. ovaj praznik je posebno vaæan jer Sveti Duh silazi na svakog ålana Crkve. Taj naroåiti dar. Kquåne reåi: Pedesetnica. Takoœe. opisan je na ikonama praznika Pedesetnica. Na dan Pedesetnice. perspektive). Sveti Duh silazi na apostole i obnavqa jedinstvo Boga i qudi kroz duhovnu izgradwu Crkve.36 Fakultet za kulturu i medije.edu.01. kroz pisane i slikane izvore. wihovom poreklu i wihovoj ulozi u prenoãewu nevidqivog sveta materijalnim sredstvima izraæavawa na ikoni Pedesetnica.02.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 45 dr Violeta Cvetkovska Ocokoqiñ UDK 291. ponaosob.

åovek moæe sozercati nevidqivog Boga i ugledati se na svetiteqe i muåenike. Uloga ikone – kao religijske slike bila je kolebqiva u hriãñanskoj istoriji. Trojice i Trojiåin dan. a sledeñi dan (Duhovski ponedeqak) je posveñen Svetom Duhu. te je stoga odreœeno kao civilizacija slike. Ovim praznikom proslavqa se „zavrãni åin osnivawa Hristove Crkve na zemqi. opipqivim sredstvima izraæavawa vekovima je bila u sluæbi religije. . Ikona Pedesetnice stoga ima podjednaku vaænost ali i dodatnu vrednost jer se na dan Silaska Svetog Duha na apostole ispunilo obeñawe Hrista. kada su stvoreni uslovi za wen pun æivot. Æeqa åoveka da dosegne duhovne visine i danas je podjednako aktuelna a civilizacijski razvoj nije uspeo da zadovoqi wegov unutraãwi svet. Sveti Duh je izlio svoje brojne darove na prisutne i omoguñio poåetak stvarawa zemaqske Crkve po uzoru na nebesku. propovedaju i åine åuda“1. koje izraæavaju razliåita znaåewa 1 Jovanoviñ. N° 9 Uvod Savremeno druãtvo ispuweno je brojnim slikama. 2005: 387. Poreklo praznika pedesetnica Silazak Svetog Duha na apostole spada u Velike praznike a poznat je pod imenima: Duhovi. a dvanaestorica apostola udostojeni da svedoåe o Hristu. ove dve ikone. meœutim wen opstanak govori o tome da posredstvom we. oboæewe apostola i poåetak duhovnog puta.46 Teoloãki åasopis. Åovekova potreba da nevidqivo predstavi materijalnim. Prema reåima Uspenskog s obzirom na to da se u pravoslavnoj Crkvi praznik Svete Trojice slavi na prvi dan Pedesetnice (u nedequ) i da se na taj dan kroz bogosluæewe izraæava dogmatsko uåewe o Svetoj Trojici.

O danu odmora. buduñi da ga ãaqe Otac i da ga predaje Sin5. u trostrukom obliåju: „u Tvorcu i Gospodu istorije spasewa. Slavqen po isteku sedam nedeqa. a Sveti Duh je siãao kao Liånost“6. Benc. Tako se kroz ikonu Svete Trojice daje nagoveãtaj tajnovitosti Boæanskog postojawa.16). 3. na pedeseti dan posle Pashe.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 47 i smisao. odgovaraju prazniku Pedesetnica2. u znak zahvalnosti prema Bogu. ovaj praznik je imao i drugo znaåewe. Loski. Praznik 2 3 4 5 6 Uspenski. Poreklo praznika Pedesetnica potiåe iz Starog Zaveta. kada je Mojsije primio Zakon na Sinaju. buduñu æetvu i kao dan (dar) Gospoda: „I praznik æetve prvina od truda tvojega ãto posijeã u poqu svojem. i praznik berbe na svrãetku svake godine. kad sabereã trud svoj sa wive“ (2 Moj. kao señawe na unutraãwe jedinstvo. uzviãenom u Boga i u Svetom Duhu koji se razliåitim darovima Duha moñno pojavqivao meœu wima“4. Tako Sveti Duh ispuwava opãtu voqu tri Lica. pedeset dana nakon Hristovog vaskrsewa i deset dana nakon wegovog vaznesewa. Isto. . stvarawe saveza izmeœu Boga i izabranog naroda. u vaskrslom Gospodu Isusu Hristu. u krãtewu Crkve ogwem i Svetim Duhom. Silazak Svetog Duha predstavqa drugo delovawe Oca jer Otac najpre ãaqe Sina a zatim i Svetog Duha. Vernici doæivqavaju Boæiju stvarnost kao i prvi hriãñani. 2006: 520.11). Evdokimov: 2009: 230. „Kada je wegovo poslawe okonåano. dok Silazak Svetog Duha na apostole otkriva promisao delovawa Svete Trojice u odnosu izmeœu Crkve i sveta3. Sin se vratio Ocu. Poseban znaåaj ova dva praznika objediwuje se u vidqivom silasku Svetog Duha na apostole. Loski 2008: 202. On je proslavqan i kao zahvalnost za prve plodove na zemqi. 2008: 208. u skladu sa reåima svetog Jovana Preteåe (Mat. 23. 2003: 120.

povezan je suãtinski s ovim uåewem. . Osnovne kompozicione elemente ikone Pedesetnica. sledi Liturgiju i stvara jednu ogromnu perspektivu koja prevazilazi okvire istorijskog fragmenta da bi izrazila ‘unutraãwu reå’ dogaœaja“ 10.48 Teoloãki åasopis. Loski 2008: 202. Æivot Crkve. i siœe po jedan na svakoga od wih“ (Dap. dræeñi svitke ili kwige u rukama. jer je Trojiånost. åine apostoli koji sede polukruæno postavqeni i plameni jezici koji sa neba silaze na wihove glave: „I pokazaãe im se razdijeqeni jezici kao ogweni. javqa se novozavetni Savez. „Tako blagodat zakona data Svetim Duhom preuzima mesto zakona sa Sinaja“7. kroz silazak Svetog Duha na apostole. Apostoli su predstavqeni potpuno smireno. Loski. 28. da imate sabor sveti. ili u æivom meœusobnom zajedniåarewu. N° 9 Nedeqa se kao señawe na dan otkrivewa zakona uobliåio kao duhovni i materijalni dar od Boga: „I na dan prvina kad prinosite nov dar Gospodu poslije svojih nedeqa. nijednoga posla ropskoga ne radite“ (4 Moj. koja je izdvojena prirodom i mnoãtvom liånosti. U skladu sa starozavetnim savezom koji je naåinio Bog izmeœu sebe i qudi. Tako je Pedesetnica. zapravo posledica Ovaploñewa. Kwige i svitci ukazuju na buduñu misiju apostola. Posebna vrednost ikone Pedesetnica je u tome ãto „izraæava najpotpuniju dogmu praznika povezanog sa osnovnom dogmom hriãñanstva – Trojedinim Bogom. na wihovo propo7 8 9 10 Uspenski. Evdokimov: 2009: 232. Ikona Pedesetnice „objediwuje sve tekstove Svetog Pisma. 2. i time je ostvaren konaåni ciq Boæanstvenog domostroja na zemqi9. 2003: 122. Isto.26). kako se uobiåajeno prikazuje. jer je tvorevina postala sposobna da primi Sveti Duh. naåelo u skladu sa kojim Crkva æivi i gradi Boæije kraqevstvo na zemqi“8.3). 2008: 209.

Vidi u Weitzmann. ?.4). K. Vremenom ñe se ustaliti izobraæavawe najpre praznog. u sredini je scena Vaznesewa a u dowem delu. veka (Manafis at al. izbor najvaænijih 11 Ozoqin ikonu datira u 7.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 49 vedawe a gestikulacija i razgovor ukazuju na silazak Svetog Duha „i ispuniãe se svi Duha Svetoga i stadoãe govoriti drugim jezicima“ (Dap. Takoœe. slika 7. Vajcman ovu ikonu datira u 10. Naroåito interesantan je srediãwi deo ikone. u monografiji Sinai: Treasures of the Monastery. u istom nivou scena Predstavqawe u hramu. Princeton University Press. Na woj su prikazane åetiri scene u tri reda: Na vrhu ikone prikazana je scena Roœewe Isusa Hrista a odmah pored we. vek. U tom srediãwem delu je ponekad prikazana Bogorodica (kao simvol Crkve). (1976: 73-76). Weitzmann. str. kao nevidqivo prisustvo Hrista – Glave Crkve. veka ili poåetak 10. ikona je datirana u drugu polovinu 9. 2. gde jarko crveni zraci koji se spuãtaju na apostole. a potom unutar tog prostora. koji deli apostole. Rani prikazi praznika pedesetnica Najstarija poznata ikona na kojoj se pojavquje silazak Svetog Duha na apostole – Pedesetnica (Penthkosth) potiåe iz 7. Ova ikona predstavqa jednu od najstarijih grupnih ikona koja pokazuje izdvojene teme. polukruænog prostora ispod apostola. prikaz starca-kraqa (kosmos) a povremeno i qudskih figura koje simbolizuju predstavnike razliåitih naroda. The Monastery of Saint Catherine at Mount Sinai. vek. u dve grupe. ali je najåeãñe prostor ostavqen prazan. 140. izviru iz kruæne mandorle (medaqona) u kojoj je Hristos.59). na Sinaju. na Tajnoj veåeri uspostavqena Evharistija – hleb i vino). 1990: 98). . tamnog. prikazana je scena Silazak Svetog Duha na apostole. koji sede u gornici (koja simvolizuje nastavak propovedi jer je u gornici. veka11 i nalazi se u manastiru Sveta Katarina. koji su bili prisutni u trenutku ovog velikog dogaœaja (Dap 2.

. Jer i Pasha naãa Hristos. Evdokimov. veñ kao tajna izbavqewa jer u pedeseti dan posle vaskrsewa Hrista.50 Teoloãki åasopis. wegov istraæivaåki rad ukazuje na to da je prvobitna ikonografija praznika Pedesetnica bila povezana sa praznikom Vaznesewe i da su pre wegovog „osamostaqewa“ rani hriãñani praznovali „osmi dan“ (Gospodwi dan) a „Dan pashe“ je slavqen kao tajna ærtve. potiåu iz perioda nakon ikonoborstva. 5. 2009: 230. a wena ikonografija se mewa „odvajawem praznika Vaznesewa. tako se i na dan Pedesetnice. u åetrdeseti dan posle Vaskrsa i Silaska Svetog Duha. stari kvasac. N° 9 kompozicionih elemenata. a ispod Hrista u mandorli. u skladu sa Prvom poslanicom Korinñanima „Odbacite. nadnosi nad qude i usinovquje ih. 2007: 28. prinoseñi åoveka kao dar Bogu. 1990. Sveti Duh u obliku goluba se pojavquje prethodno na krãtewu Isusa Hrista. nalazi jedva primetan golub naslikan s lica (iscrtan na zlatnoj pozadini). da bude novo tijesto.7). 98-99. jer sva kasnija izobraæewa. izmeœu apostola. dakle. simetriju i druge uobiåajene elemente putem kojih opisani dogaœaj otkriva sveto projavqivawe i slavu12. kao ãto ste beskvasni. posredstvom Svetog Duha. koji su predstavqeni u sedeñem poloæaju. ærtvova se za nas“ (1 Kor. Meœutim. Ozoqin. Sveti Duh silazi na apostole u skladu sa obeñawem Spasiteqa: „A Utjeãiteq Duh Sveti. u pokretu ogwenih jezika Otac. veka“14. u pedeseti dan – znaåi veñ krajem 4. Ipak. Interesantno je primetiti da se u sredini. Tako se ona ne smatra samo kao posledwi dan pashalnog perioda. koja ñe se ubrzo uobliåiti u prikaz Pedesetnice. a opravdawe na sceni Pedesetnica (gde ñe se i kasnije pojavqivati povremeno) moæe se pronañi u reåima Evdokimova13 da kao ãto se Sveti Duh na dan krãtewa Gospodweg nadnosi nad qudsku prirodu Hristovu i usinovquje je. koga ñe otac poslati u ime 12 13 14 Manafis. Ozoqin celokupnu ikonografiju naziva starohriãñanskom.

2007: 33).Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 51 moje. sa æenama i sa Marijom materom Isusovom i sa brañom wegovom“ (Dap. moguñe predstavqawe Silaska Svetog Duha u obliku plamenih zraka. 16 Vidi: Slika 3 (Ozoqin. veka (Monza. likovi imaju dubqe. br. 1. takoœe prañen anœelom: „I dok netremice gledahu za wim kako ide na nebo. Sliåna predstava Vaznesewe-Pedesetnica pojavquje se i na ampuli iz 10. Na woj pronalazimo. spuãta se po pet zraka iz Hristove mandorle. 2007: 46). pronalazi se joã na ampuli iz 6. 2007: 39. sa pretpostavkom da se odnose na ogwene jezike silaska Svetog Duha18. a sa leve strane je starozavetni sveãtenik sa kadionicom u ruci17. 1019). Gorwi deo scene prati iste elemente 15 Isto. veka (Bobbio. 1. 18 19 Vidi: Ozoqin. „Posledwi dan pedesetnice. a ispod Hrista u mandorli. Hrista na prestolu sa kwigom u ruci. Ovu scenu Ozoqin naziva Vaznesewe-Pedesetnica (2007: 40). simboliåko znaåewe u odnosu na realno prisustvo u trenutku nekog dogaœaja. u mandorli. gle.26). U dowem delu nalazi se Bogorodica Oranta. 17 S obzirom na to da na ikoni ne postoji hronoloãko vreme. br. Sa desne strane Bogorodice nalazi se sveti Jovan Krstiteq u stavu propovedawa. anœelima.14). prañen anœelom. 2016) u sceni Vaznesewe. nedeqa saæima unutar sebe u jedan dan „tajinsko znaåewe pedeset dana“15. postavqena je „zvezda prañena personifikacijama sunca i meseca. 10). Meœutim. noãen. 2007: 32-36. dva åovjeka u haqinama bijelim stadoãe pored wih“ (Dap. Iznad wene glave. koji blagosiqa. u gorwem delu. Jedno od utemeqewa wenog prisustva na ovoj sceni pronalazimo u pomenu zajedniåke molitve: „Ovi svi bijahu istrajno i jednoduãno na molitvi i moqewu. . Na levu i desnu grupu od Bogorodice. On ñe vas nauåiti svemu i podsjetiñe vas na sve ãto vam rekoh“ (Jovan 14. koji nose upaqene bakqe“. Vidi: Slika 8 (Ozoqin.

Takoœe. 20 Likovni simvol boæanskog delovawa i spasewa. veñ da su se proizvodile u velikoj koliåini.33). i da su predstavqale neãto nalik danaãwem industrijskom. Dap. 66. Meœutim. to je postalo sve.2). Gabra (2001. scena prikquåena Vaznesewu. 23). 2007: 45-47. 2. slika 20. veka pomiwe se da je postojala grnåarska radionica koja je proizvodila 15 000 kråaga za vino. godiãwe. Tako one nisu bile usamqeni proizvodi ranih hriãñanskih umetnika veñ tipski. Vidi: Skalova. Takoœe se smatra da ampule22 nisu bile unikatan proizvod. Grnåarija je bila jeftina i masovno se proizvodila. 21 22 Vidi: Ozoqin. vek) na kome je prikazan Danilo sa lavovima. 2005: 374). podiæe se i uze ga oblak ispred oåiju wihovih“. sa dve kamile koje kleåe.8) neposredno pre Vaznesewa („I ovo rekavãi dok oni netremice gledahu. „jer je sve to ruka moja stvorila.9). veli Gospod“ (Is. 1. 1. Boæijom vaznese se“ (Dap.52 Teoloãki åasopis. okruæena apostolima. po tipskom obrascu srebrnih ploåica. . prati isti kompozicioni obrazac kao ampula sa svetim Minom (Templ. a u hriãñanskom slikarstvu se javqa od 4. namewenog za prodaju hodoåasnicima. dræaå za lampu od terakote (3. Brojne ampule (ili åuturice) bile su åesto ukraãavane scenom svetog Mine u molitvi. poznat u antici i judaistiåkom slikarstvu. veka (Jovanoviñ. Ispod mandorle sa Hristom. Ozoqin21 smatra da je ovo prvo (poznato) predstavqawe Silaska Svetog Duha na apostole i da je usled nepostojawa posebne ikonografije vezane za ovaj dogaœaj. dubqa simbolika pronalazi se u bliskoj vezi izmeœu ova dva dogaœaja jer Hristos obeñava Silazak Svetog Duha na apostole („nego ñete primiti silu kada siœe Sveti Duh“ Dap. nalazi se otvorena (desnica20) ruka Gospodwa jer „Desnicom. U jednom egipatskom papirusu iz 3. serijskom proizvodu. N° 9 predstavqawa dok je na dowem delu prikazana Bogorodica Oranta. 2009: 126). koja je ispustila goluba – Svetog Duha a sa obe wene strane izviru kratki svetlosni zraci iz mandorle. dakle. usmereni ka apostolima.

Na oreolu Bogorodice (koji je jedini pozlañen) je takoœe plameni jezik ali je on povezan sa golubom koji se nalazi iznad we i spuãta se iz nebeskog svoda. moæe svedoåiti sledeña opisana iluminacija. Vremenom ñe se luåni (arhitektonski) svod izobraæavati kao aluzija na mesto dogaœaja. kao znak prosvetqewa osnovnog åelovoœe tela i sadræanih misli (. i iz åijeg kquna izlazi pomenuti plamen. odmah iznad glava apostola. 2007: 60-65).47). 2005: 388. ikona ili fresaka. u kojoj su apostoli bili okupqeni u trenutku silaska Svetog Duha26. Detaqnije (Ozoqin. Bogorodica kao majka Crkve. 2. . prema reåima svetog Grigorija Bogoslova ukazuje na to da je Sveti Duh siãao u obliku jezika „koji su spuãteni na glave apostola. to jest u gornici... Tako se ona pojavquje u saåuvanom rukopisu (Jevanœeqe iz Ravule) krajem 6. vek) sa novinom uvoœewa elementa enterijera koji ukazuje na odvijawe dogaœaja u zatvorenom prostoru. 25 26 Uspenski. Loski 2008: 209. Vidi: Slika 12 (Ozoqin. okruæena apostolima na åijim oreolima se nalaze plameni jeziåci a iznad wih je tamni svod koji se nalazi iznad celokupne grupe. Vremenom ñe se scene Vaznesewe i Pedesetnica razdvojiti23 ali ñe Bogorodica joã dugo åiniti sastavni deo brojnih ikona Pedesetnice. Tako se scena Vaznesewe-Pedesetnica pojavquje u dva sirijska rukopisa (14-16. Moæe se 23 Pojedinaåni sluåajevi ovakvih scena javqañe se povremeno i kasnije.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 53 utvrœeni obrasci izobraæavawa scena i svetiteqa. U prilog tome da su one najverovatnije bile replike scena sa iluminiranih rukopisa. 2007: 53). 24 Rukopis se nalazi u Lavrentinskoj biblioteci u Firenci. veka24. Jovanoviñ. zadræava srediãwe mesto u predstavi „a Gospod svaki dan dodavaãe Crkvi one koji se spasavahu“ (Dap.) pokazujuñi da Sveti Duh prebiva u svetima“25. Postavqawe plamenih jezika na oreole. to jest gornicu. Bogorodica je prikazana u sredini.

Prema reåima Uspenskog 27 28 Ozoqin. tron. Ova scena u skladu je sa reåima svetog Grigorija Bogoslova da je na dan silaska Svetog Duha na apostole projavqeno konaåno delovawe Treñe liånosti Svete Trojice kao sile osveñewa. Loski. Tako je opisana simboliåka predstava neopisive Svete Trojice. izmeœu apostola.neznaboæaåkog sveta. Meœutim. i jedan golub na Kwizi. iz 7. Takoœe. Silazak Svetog Duha koji proishodi iz Oca i izliva se kroz Boga Sina (Dap. a koji se prvi put pojavquje joã na pomenutoj ikoni. otvorena kwiga Jevanœeqa. jednosuãtne i nerazdeqive. ni ugotovqeni presto. nalazi se prazan prostor. Obrazac dvanaestorice apostola (bez prisustva Bogorodice ali sa prikazom zlatnog goluba) koji primaju Sveti Duh. pojava praznog prostora moæe se pratiti joã od burnog ikonoboraåkog perioda 9. 2007: 74. simvol Sina.54 Teoloãki åasopis.33) otkriva svetu blagodarnost bogopoznawa tajanstva Svete Trojice. simvol Oca. U sredini. unutar trodelne kompozicije. „Svi apostoli gledaju ka sredini gde se nalazi simboliåka predstava Svete Trojice. Ovaj prikaz prisutan je u antici a joã ranije u scenama drevnog Egipta kao simbol prisustva nevidqivog Boga. dok ñe se uporedo sa wim razviti polukruæni prostor ispod apostola sa simvolizacijom mraka . Tako dolazi do ispuwewa otkrivewa jednog Boga u tri Ipostasi. koji ostaje iza wih. 2. . veka. N° 9 pretpostaviti da je nebeski svod predstavqen iseåkom iznad Bogorodice i apostola preteåa uspostavqawa polukruænog prostora koji ñe se kasnije javiti. simvol Svetog Duha“27. u manastiru Sveta Katarina. odreœen praznim tronom (ugotovqenim prestolom). iznad apostola. kao i brojni drugi kompozicijski elementi i simvoli. prazna stolica nije izvorno hriãñanskog porekla. na iluminacijama iz Hludovskog Psaltira. simvolizujuñi prikaz uzlaznog puta na ikoni. ñe se vremenom ustaliti. veka. odnosno konaåno ispuwewe obeñawa. 2008: 202. a ipak razliåite“28. Uspenski.

kroz silazak Svetog Duha.13. 6. åija tela åine Crkvu. Uspenski. postavqenih u polukrugu. najåeãñe u æivoj gestikulaciji dok se na wihove oreole iz nebeskog svoda spuãtaju zraci Duha Svetog. Apostoli su prikazani. Evdokimov. Ova scena kompozicijski veoma podseña na ikonu Poduåavawe u hramu. U wemu se javqaju dva prikaza: qudi i/ili kraq. 3.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 55 hriãñanstvo je u mnogoboæaåkom svetu izabralo sve ono ãto je wegovo i nazvalo ga „hriãñanstvom pre Hrista“ 29. Kao ãto „iziœe Isus i uåaãe“ (veliko veåerwe. izvija se i wen dowi deo obrazujuñi polukruæni tamni prostor. 2000: 50. Otkr. Moñ propovedawa (kao jedan od darova) se sa Hrista (bogoåoveka). Oni se nalaze unutar enterijera. Tako su „dvanaest apostola koji obrazuju jedan konaåan oblik (polukrug) predivan izraz jedinstva tela Crkve sa raznovrsnoãñu wenih ålanova“ a wihovo grupisawe je dovrãeno prazninom – nepopuwenim mestom – mestom nevidqive glave Crkve. stihira glasa 2) obrañajuñi se stareãinama naroda tako su se i apostoli okupili u nedoumici oko naåina propovedawa i iãåekivawu da postanu dostojni da ãire Hristovu nauku. Qudi na sceni simvolizuju „qude poboæne iz svakog naroda koji je pod nebom“ (Dap. 2008: 208. Od 12. Tako se uspostavqa obrazac dvanaestorice apostola (Lk. i primaju Sveti Duh. veka sve åeãñe se javqaju ikone Pedesetnice bez prisustva Bogorodice. Uporedo sa izvijawem polukruæne klupe na kojoj sede apostoli. 2009: 232. . prenosi na åoveka (apostole). 5) jer Gospod kaæe: „Sabrañu sve narode“ (Joil. Na wenom mestu postavqen je prazan prostor koji odvaja dve grupe apostola. 20. dakle u gornici. Loski. Tako i uputstvo za izobraæavawe Silaska Svetog Duha na apostole (poznatom i kao Duhovi) u Kwizi popa 29 30 31 Uspenski. 2. Hristos nije vidqivo prisutan ali je On „Glava koja je uvek prisutna“31.2). odnosno Hristom“30.14) kao dvanaest plemena Izraiqa.

. i oko wega jako svetlo a dvanaest ogwenih jezika izlazi od wega i spuãta se na svakog pojedinog od tih apostola“35. i nad domom. tada prinese svako svoje napisano. sluãajuñi glas sa nebesa. Novogradska ikona pedesetnice – silazak svetog duha na apostole Uloga ikone je da propoveda podjednako kao i reå. Kada prostreãe i proåitaãe.. Sveti 32 33 34 35 36 Poznatoj i pod nazivom Drugi jerusalimski rukopis. U priruåniku za ikonopisce pod nazivom Erminija porodice Zografski34 (1728) pronalazimo sledeñe uputstvo za slikawe scene Silazak Svetog Duha: „Dom i dvanaestorica apostola sede u polukrugu. Najraniji poznati prevod Erminije Dionisija iz Furne na slovenski jezik. gore.56 Teoloãki åasopis. 2002: 319.. Luka se tako nazva prvi zograf na zemqi“36. i u woj star åovek dræi pred sobom ubrus obema rukama. 2002: 615-616. I utvrdiãe ga u Veliki Åetvrtak. N° 9 Danila32 (1674) sadræi tekst prema Isaiji: „Gospod ovo kaæe: Uzeñu vas iz svih naroda i okupiti vas iz svih plemena“33. Glas sa nebesa prestade. Mediñ. Jovanoviñ.) I tu uzeãe hartiju i pisahu. Sveti Duh kao golub. i na ubrusu dvanaest svitaka. Tu uze sveti Luka i naslika åetiri ikone gledajuñi na lice Bogorodice. I sastaviãe sveto Jevanœeqe. Prema apokifnom jevanœequ ikona (slikana rukom åoveka) je nastala neposredno posle Jevanœeqa: „ (. Mediñ. 2005: 367. na glavi ima krunu i nad wim ova slova (KOZMOS?) a slavenski (M?R?). i ispod wih mala prostorija.

u mraku. Na ikoni kao i na fresci. boæanskog sveta materijalnim. Joil. postepeno se okreñe ka unutra. uvoœewem dimenzije stvarnog prostora i vremena (prikazivawe s leœa. 2. postavqen je kraq u crvenoj odeædi i sa belim ubrusom na kome se nalazi dvanaest svitaka. . duhovnu 37 Uspenski.1). a wen odnos koji je uvek bio „spoqa“ prema onome koji se moli. 17. to jest prikazivawu viãeg. Ikona Pedesetnica – Silazak Svetog Duha na apostole pripada Novgorodskoj ãkoli iz 15. boja. Iako se veñ od 13. bezvremenu ravan. veka (Rusija). iz razliåitih uglova) ikona o kojoj se ovde govori uspela je da saåuva vezu sa predawem u svom najåistijem duhovnom smislu. veka pojavquje manirizam u ikonopisu.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 57 Grigorije Palama kaæe da „åovek ne moæe videti Boga drugaåije osim posredstvom simvola i telesnih praobraza“37. perspektiva. Kompozicija. i 14. celina i celokupna scena imaju svoj naroåit. u zatvorenoj prostoriji (gornici). na vrhu scene prikazan je u polukrugu nebeski svod. Iznad. iz kojeg se spuãta dvanaest ogwenih zraka ili vatrenih jezika (ovde prikazanih u tamno plavoj boji) na apostole. geometrijske figure i linija potpuno su podreœeni prenoãewu eshatoloãke poruke. 2. Tako se Sveti Duh izliva na apostole ali i na sve prisutne „jednoduãno“ (Dap. kao znak krãtewa Duhom i vatrom jer po reåima Joila Gospod kaæe: „Izliñu od Duha mojega na svako tijelo“ (Dap. vidqivim i prepoznatqivim sredstvima komunikacije. 28-29). svaki detaq. eshatoloãki smisao. Stav koji je dominirao na ikoni ranijih vekova zamewuje se gestikulacijom. uvodeñi posmatraåa u drugu. iz profila. ka sopstvenom svetu. 2. U povijenom luku ispod wih. Na ikoni su prikazani apostoli koji sede na polukruæno postavqenoj klupi (eksedri). Ona simvolizuje jedinstvo u mnoãtvu. 2000: 161. Telo Crkve i sklad sabornosti prikazan na ovoj ikoni izobraæavañe se vremenom na svim prikazima vaseqenskih sabora. Stoga su na ikoni prisutni svi apostoli.

kraj 9. koje se na svim ikonama Pedesetnice pojavquje (Ozoqin. Vidi: Ocokoqiñ. delio je narode. ova ikona je dodatno neobiåna jer predstavqa jedinu poznatu ikonu na kojoj nema praznog prostora izmeœu apostola. Svaki apostol je u posebnom i drugaåijem stavu i poloæaju od ostalih u skladu sa primawem raznovrsnih darova (1 Kor. veka prema Ozoqinu. jer „stadoãe govoriti drugim jezicima. upravo prema reåima kondaka: „Kada je Gospod siãavãi pomeãao jezike. kao ãto im Duh davaãe da kazuju“ (Dap. objavquje wihovo harmoniåno zajedniãtvo. 2004: 75. Okrenuti jedni prema drugima oni izgledaju kao da razgovaraju. Pariz. Oni sede na sitronu (antiåki obiåaj sedewa na polukruænoj klupi po vaænosti) a prvi meœu jednakima su apostol Petar i Pavle39. Tako ñe se åudo izlivawa Svetog Duha u vidu dara jezika vremenom u crkvama podraæavati na sluæbi kroz pojavu poznatu kao glasolalija. sve je pozvao u jedinstvo da sloæno slavimo Najsvetijeg Duha“ (Pedesetnica. . 40 Jedan od upeåatqivih primera prikazivawa mnogoqudnosti je iluminirani prikaz Pedesetnice u Besedama svetog Grigorija Bogoslova (Nacionalna biblioteka. a kada je delio ogwene jezike. 2. kondak glasa 8). Na ranijim prikazima.4).58 Teoloãki åasopis. 2. Tako se potvrœuje jedinstvo u mnoãtvu jer „razliåiti su darovi ali je Duh isti“ (1 Kor. Apostoli su izobraæeni u odeñi filosofa – uåiteqa. oni åine celinu sa jedinstvenim skladom i ritmom. Paris Graec. Zajedno. 8. celina koju obrazuju ukazuje na wihovo meœusobno razumevawe. Meœutim.10). 510. 2009: 232. N° 9 zajednicu u kojoj liånost uzrasta38. nasuprot pometwi jezika u Vavilonu. 12. prikazivana je u dnu ikone (viãe 38 38 Evdokimov.13). Wihova gestikulacija ispuwena je smirewem i skladnim poretkom.4). mnogoqudnost40 koja se pomiwe u Delima apostolskim. folio 301). Bogosluæewe na dan Silaska Svetog Duha. jer su pojedini qudi koji su ih posmatrali govorili „nakitili su se“ ili „napili su se slatkog vina“ (Dap. 2007: 6).

blagodat a dvanaest svitaka koje sa poãtovawem dræi na pokrovu. koji su doneli svetlost åitavom svetu svojim pouåavawem“42. da svako ko vjeruje u mene ne ostane u tami“ (Jov. svetlost o kojoj se ovde govori nije prirodna veñ Boæanska svetlost pred kojom se svetlost sunca zamraåuje. on „pruæa ruke kako bi primio.46). Uspenski. Evdokimov. Meœutim. a on sam je Kosmos – „priroda koju je zarobio knez ovoga sveta“. koji vlada u svetu i belo platno u wegovim rukama sa dvanaest svitaka oznaåava dvanaest apostola. uloga zlata je dubqa jer sve boje potpadaju pod zakon prirodne svetlosti a na nebesima je Boæanska svetlost koja sve proæima. dakle u zatvorenoj 41 42 43 Ocokoqiñ. jer bi oblici bez svetlosti bili nevidqivi.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 59 qudskih figura) ali ñe vremenom biti zamewena simvoliånim prikazom kraqa kao personifikacije åoveka ili qudi. 2-5). simvolizuje propoved dvanaest apostola. Meœutim. uopãte. 2004: 75. 12. S obzirom na to da su apostoli u gornici. Evdokimov o ovoj neobiånoj liånosti govori kao o zarobqeniku koji je okruæen sveopãtim paklom u kome se nalazi nekrãteni svet. Starac obitava „u tamnom prostoru jer je ceo svet ranije bio bez vere. Svet ili Knez Mira41. Loski 2008: 209. kraqevska kruna simvolizuje greh. apostolsku misiju Crkve i obeñawe spasewa“ 43. to jest svetlosti jer „zasja se lice wegovo kao svijetlost“ i haqine wegove „postadoãe bijele kao sneg“ (Mat. on je pognut godinama. Stoga se tama u kojoj æive neverni moæe protumaåiti kroz reåi Gospoda: „Ja u svijet doœoh kao svjetlost. on govori o tome kako starac i sam æeli da se prosvetli. 17. u pisanim izvorima. primetno je poistoveñivawe zlata i bele boje. wegova crvena odora simvolizuje ærtvovawe œavolove krvi. jer ga greh Adama åini starcem. Iznad wegove glave najåeãñe stoje inskripcije Kosmos. . Joã od antike prirodna svetlost se istiåe kao uslov vidqive lepote. Meœutim. Meœutim. Na ikoni dominiraju zlatne povrãine. 2009: 233. i on.

2009: 148. kao jedno telo Crkve oni duhovno uzrastaju u Hristu i uspiwu se u sozercawu Boga. preovladavaju nad ostalim apostolima. Evdokimov. Tako apostoli Petar i Pavle. 2009: 328.60 Teoloãki åasopis. 2009: 328. Kompozicija ikone graœena je tako da se otvara prema nebu. „Unutraãwi ili duhovni svet je jedino stvarno mesto u nama u kome duhovni dogaœaji ne podleæu zakonima vremena i trodimenzionalnog prostora“44. Postavqawem dva apostola na vrhu uspostavqena je zakonitost obrnute perspektive i izjednaåena vaænost apostola (prvi meœu jednakima). Graœevina na ikoni predstavqa zatvarawe od spoqaãweg (pojavnog) sveta i otvarawe ka duhovnom svetu unutar åoveka. podjednako primajuñi Svetog Duha. „Kontrast izmeœu ova dva sapostojeña sveta veoma je oãtar. Ikona prati naåelo obrnute perspektive u skladu sa postavqawem likova po tematskom znaåaju. 44 45 46 Templ. gore je veñ „nova zemqa“ vizija idealnog Kosmosa obasjana boæanstvenim ogwem. Na ikoni je arhitektura (koja uvek ima ulogu da prikaæe da se dogaœaj odvija u zasebnom prostoru) osobena i po tome ãto istovremeno vidimo i spoqaãwe i unutraãwe vidove kuñe. prvi meœu jednakima. Sa druge strane. Isto. Neproporcionalnost apostola u odnosu na graœevinu potvrœuje ovo odreœewe. . N° 9 prostoriji. Istovremeno sa uspiwawem deãava se i silazak u tamu. oni isijavaju svetlost tako da na wima nema senki. Svi zajedno. Na taj naåin je ikonopisac uspeo da izbegne zamku iluzije prostora i obmane qudskog oka. Energije Svetog Duha dejstvuju u ciqu osloboœewa i preobraæewa zarobqenog kosmosa“46. dakle prati uzlaznu liniju åoveka u sozercawu „trojiåne energije usredsreœene u Svetom Duhu“45. tmina na prozorima simvolizuje zamraåenu prirodnu svetlost usled projavqivawa Svetog Duha. apostoli su izvor svetlosti koja se izlila na wih. svojom veliåinom. ka kojoj teæi stari kraq.

U skladu sa Plotinovim uåewem „celokupna vaseqena moæe biti uspostavqena kao oktava ili osmostepena lestvica do Boga ili Apsolutnog biña sa Vaseqenskom Tamom ili nivoom Apsolutnog Nebiña“50. Prema wegovim reåima „peñina naglaãava najniæe mesto u vaseqeni“ ali i „svetlost i tama ili najviãe i najniæe povezani su sa naåelima Boæanskog zraka (ogwa)“49. Meœutim. Ajnalov (1901) je prvi izneo pretpostavku o sliånosti wegovog izobraæewa sa vizantijskom pedesetnicom48. Na wegovom dijagramu spuãta se deset sunåevih zraka koji obasjavaju zemqu. zraci svetlosti se pojavquju i u drugim kulturama. „Drevni Istok je kosmos predstavqao u obliku kruga ili klipeusa i stavqao „Kosmokratora“. kao medaqon unutar kojeg je poprsje mladiña. Novgorodska ikona Pedesetnice strukturno je organizovana tako da podseña na stenu sa peñinom. Sunce je personifikovano na antiåki naåin. u odnosu na jaåinu svetlosti (krañi i duæi zraci). i spuãtaju na zemqu (tj. U hriãñanskom kontekstu sunåevi zraci se pronalaze joã u Hriãñanskoj topografiji Kosme Indikoplesta (6. 2007: 142. Na osnovu ove sheme Templ (2009) je uspostavio pojam „vaseqenske topografije“ koja se javqa na svim ikonama. uzdignutog na nivo boæanstva – boga Atona. vek) åiji dijagram objaãwava naåin na koji se zraci sunca spuãtaju na zemqu. u wegovo srediãte“47. 2009: 140. na osnovu Indikoplestusove topografije. vode poreklo joã iz drevnog Egipta. 2009: 114. boga ili cara. gde su simvolizovali oæivqavajuñu svetlost sunca. . Isto. 2007: 141. qude). U skladu sa opisanom simbolikom ona prati obrazac koji je uspostavio Templ (2009). Templ.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 61 Zraci koji se pojavquju. Isto. i moæe se tumaåiti i sa tog simboliåkog nivoa. gde izviru iz kruænog oblika sunca. Na 47 48 49 50 Ozoqin.

22. zemaqsku Crkvu saåiwenu od qudi. N° 9 nivou Carstva Tame i Zemqe. Na ikoni su prema Templovom tumaåewu „liånosti i dogaœaji u potpunosti predstavqeni u vaseqenskom skladu a ne na zemqi“52. knez ovoga sveta. 51 52 Vidi: Teodosije Hilandarac.38). Kada se qudi „obuku u bele haqine“ biñe poput Hrista i æiveñe u sozercawu Wegovog lika „u duãi naslikana“51. koja se zavrãava plavim lukom (veñ pomiwanom na iluminaciji u Jevanœequ iz Ravule). Paralela se moæe pronañi i u Templovom polukruænom prikazu nebesa sa polukruænom graœevinom na ikoni. u najviãem i najsvetijem delu. Vrhovi graœevine obrazuju obrnut trougao kao simbol Svetog Duha. tj. Tako se potvrœuje izlivawe Svetog Duha i uzlazni put na Gospodu. Tako apostoli predstavqaju zemqu. vode i „rijeku vode æivota“ (Otkr. .1) jer iz utrobe verujuñih „poteñi ñe rijeke vode æive“ (Jn. U tami. Æitije svetog Simeona i Save. Na vrhu ikone. 7. Templ. Materije paralela se moæe pronañi sa kraqem koji prebiva u tami. 2009: 116.62 Teoloãki åasopis. bdi starac. na ikoni Pedesetnice. Bogdanoviñ. pronalazimo desnicu Boga. Geometrijski prikaz podjednako sadræi paralele izmeœu sheme vaseqene i ikone Pedesetnica. belog goluba i/ili plamene zrake koji se spuãtaju na apostole i sve prisutne. 1963: 80. na koje se iz nebesa izliva blagodat Svetog Duha darujuñi im razne darove.

2003: 119. ponosno prenoseñi poklowewe na prvolik“. Dogaœajem silaska Svetog Duha na apostole ispuweno je obeñawe Spasiteqa i krãtewe Crkve ogwem jer kada je Hristos proslavqen (Jn. 7. Tako se otkriva i potvrœuje promisao delovawa Svete Trojice u odnosu izmeœu Crkve i sveta. Jer kako kaæe sveti Grigorije Palama. i pre svih najtajanstveniju i sveãtenu Sluæbu i Priåeãñe i Sabrawe (litugrijsko)“. Tako je Crkva „punota buduñi da je Duh Sveti oæivotvorava i ispuwava Boæanstvom. Loski. omivena i proåiãñena krvqu Hristovom)“ jer „Hristos uzlazi da bi siãao Duh Sveti“54. „primamo sva crkvena predawa pisana i nepisana. za nas ovaploñenoga. ovo javqawe ne deãava se po suãtini veñ blagodati i sili i energiji koja je zajedniåka Ocu. koje 53 54 55 Loski.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 63 Zakquåak Æivot Crkve je suãtinski povezan sa dogmom Trojedinog Boga. ispuwenu blagodañu Svetog Duha. Sinu i Duhu. U woj Boæanstvo obitava telesno kao ãto je obitavalo u oboæenom Hristovom åoveãtvu“53. jednu Crkvu. Triipostasno i Svemoñno. Stoga se „poklawamo ikoni opisanoga. Crkva gradi odraz nebeskog carstva na zemqi. verujuñi u Jedno Boæanstvo. i tako daqe) zajedno odraz na zemaqskom planu Boæanskog Trojedinog æivota“55. i po svemu onome sa åime Bog zajedniåari i po blagodati se sjediwuje sa svetim anœelima i qudima.39) delovawe Svetog Duha je dobilo novu dimenziju u odnosu na prethodno delovawe kada je „govorio kroz proroke“. 2008: 208. Uspenski. U skladu sa izdvojenom prirodom i liånostima Svete Trojice. Sina Boæijeg. Tako apostoli åine jedno telo. Loski. Tako su „struktura kanona i naåelo celokupne hriãñanske strukture (crkvene zajednice. 2003: 120-122. . „On silazi u svet i Crkvu (koja je iskupqena. manastiri.

.64 Teoloãki åasopis. Na ikoni. eshatoloãki smisao. geometrijske figure i linija potpuno su podreœeni prenoãewu eshatoloãke poruke. Kompozicija. perspektiva. svaki kompozicijski element ima svoj naroåit. Ispovedawe pravoslavne vere. boja. boæanskog sveta vidqivim sredstvima komunikacije. to jest prikazivawu viãeg. 56 Sveti Grigorije Palama. (1978: 473-477). Tako se elementi kompozicije poistoveñuju sa reåima iz svetih spisa a gledawe ikone postaje åitawe koje vodi ka sozercawu Lika Gospodweg. N° 9 nikako ne gubi jedinstvenost i prostotu zbog sila i Ipostasi (svojih)“56.

Weitzmann. Jovanoviñ. Apokrifi novozavetni. Loski. Beograd: Prosveta. Beograd: Åigoja. Sveta Gora Atonska: Manastir Hilandar. Srpska kwiæevna zadruga i Prosveta. Daniåiñ. Megatrend Univerziteta i Visoka ãkola – Akademija Srpske Pravoslavne Crkve za umetnost i konservaciju. Ernst 2006. Biblija ili Sveto Pismo Staroga i Novoga Zavjeta. Ogled o mistiåkom bogoslovqu Istoåne Crkve. Beograd. Dimitrije 1963. Kurt 1976. Pavle 2009. Evdokimov. Œuro 1998. Beograd: Jugoslovensko biblijsko druãtvo. Zoran 2005. Vizije u hriãñanstvu. . Benc. Beograd: Fakultet za kulturu i medije. Jovanoviñ. Vladimir 2003. Tomislav 2005. Princeton: Princeton University. Umetnost ikone: teologija lepote. Stare srpske biografije. The Monastery of Saint Catherine at Mount Sinai. Beograd: Muzej SPC.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 65 Bibliografija Bogdanoviñ. Azbuånik pravoslavne ikonografije i graditeqstva.

66

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

Mediñ, Milorad 2002. Stari slikarski priruånici. Beograd: Republiåki zavod za zaãtitu spomenika kulture i Druãtvo prijateqa Svete Gore Atonske. Naniñ, Mirko 2005. Tropari i kondaci za sve dane u godini. Ãid: Srpska pravoslavna zajednica Ãid. Ozoqin, Nikolaj 2007. Pravoslavna ikona Pedesetnice: poreklo i razvoj wenih konstitutivnih tema u Bizantijskoj epohi. Begrad-Ãibenik: Istina, izdavaåka ustanova Eparhije dalmatinske. Ocokoqiñ, Jugoslav 2004. Ikona: åitawe, pisawe i sozercawe sa teologijom ikone. Beograd: Jugoslav Ocokoqiñ. Palama, Grigorije 1978. „Ispovedawe pravoslavne vere“. prev. Atanasije Jevtiñ. Beograd: Teoloãki pogledi 4. Skalova, Zuzana, Gawdat Gabra 2006. Icons of the Nile Waley. Egypt: Egyptian International Pub lishing Company – Longman. Templ, Riåard 2009. Ikone i tajnoviti izvori hriãñanstva. Kragujevac: Kaleniñ. Tomadakis, Nikolaos B., Konstantinos A. Manafis, Grossmann Peter, at al. 1990. Sinai: Treasures of the Monastery. ed. Manafis A. Konstantinos. Athens: George A. Christopoulos, John. C. Bastias.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

67

Uspenski, Leonid 2000. Teologija ikone. Sveta Gora Atonska: Manastir Hilandar. Uspenski, Leonid, Vladimir Loski 2008. Smisao ikone. Jasen: Nikãiñ.

68

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

Symbolism of the Feast of Pentecost: Written and Painted Sources
Resume This paper will discuss the symbolism of the Christian feast of Pentecost, through the written and painted sources. On the day of Pentecost, the Holy Spirit descends on the apostles and restores the unity of God and people through the spiritual building of the Church. Also, this holiday is especially important because the Holy Spirit descends on each member of the Church and to everyone gives special gifts. The event in which the apostles speak different languages and understand each other is especially important. The particular gift, that occurs through the descend of the Holy Spirit is described in the feast’s icons of Pentecost. In accordance with fact that the picture through the history of Christianity had halting, but a very important role, in transmission of Tradition, emphasis of this work is on research of symbolism of single art elements (color, geometry, perspective), their origin and their role in transmitting of the invisible world by material means on the icon of Pentecost. Keywords: the Pentecost, icons, symbolism, the Holy Spirit.

69 Mr Nikola Kneæeviñ Protestantski teoloãki fakultet u Novom Sadu nikola.knezevic@nsts-online.org UDK 233.14 Primljeno: 01.04.2010 Prihvañeno: 05.04.2010 Originalni nauåni rad

KOMPARATIVNI PRISTUP: PECCATUM ORIGINALE
Rezime Postoje razliåita stanoviãta po pitanju poimanja termina prvorodnog greha (lat. peccatum originale) pre svega, u odnosu na poimanje slike Boæije (lat. Imago Dei) u åoveku, odnosno, u odnosu na ono ãto ona predstavlja posle pada, ili, taånije, u odnosu na ono ãto je od od te slike ostalo. Stanoviãta se razlikuju u sve tri provenijencije: Pravoslavnoj, Rimokatoliåkoj i Protestanskoj. Pravoslavna antropologija smatra da åovek svojim padom nije u potpunosti izgubio sposobnost duhovnog poimanja. Rimokatoliåka tradicija insistira na tome da ljudska narav nije potpuno iskvarena, da je åovekova sloboda da åini dobro duboko oslabljena, ali da nije i izgubljena. Iako je na prvi pogled sliåna pravoslavnoj, rimokatoliåka antropologija se od nje bitno razlikuje po pitanju poimanja ljudske prirode, åijoj razlici doprinosi i uvoœenje pojma donum superadditum. Nasuprot tome, u protestantskoj provenijenciji preovladava stanoviãte o potpunoj iskvarenosti ljudske naravi koja podrazumeva da je åovek u potpunosti izgubio slobodu i moñ upravljanja prema dobru i ispunjavanja Boæijih zapovesti iz ljubavi prema Bogu. Kljuåne reåi: praroditeljski greh, imago Dei, peccatum originale originans, donum superadditum

bile odreœene za slobodno razvijanje u smeru savrãenstva. telo bilo besmrtno. non posse mori posse non mori Isto.dar Boæije blagodati. buduñi neokrnjene grehom. åovekovog odnosa sa Bogom i åovekovog odnosa sa beslovesnom prirodom. po prirodi. bestrasan. tamu i smrt. Stalna komunikacija sa Bogom bi omoguñila stvarnu besmrtnost . nameñe ideju da su njegove duhovne sile. bezgreãnosti. prvobitno stanje je obeleæeno savrãenim skladom samoga åoveka. i telesno savrãenstvo prvozdanog åoveka jeste bilo samo relativno. N° 9 Posedovanjem lika Boæijeg. 2003: 2. bezgreãan.6 Naãi praroditelji nisu ostali u stanju prvobitne pravednosti. zaslaœena prividnom naivnoãñu. åovek je od Boga primio fiziåku i duhovnu snagu neophodnu za njegovo ostvarenje. otpali od Boga. åovek je izaãao iz ruke Boæije neporoåan.70 Teoloãki åasopis. nego su prestupivãi zapovest Boæiju. Tudoran. Sablaænjivi zmijin predlog izaziva u Evinoj duãi oseñaj gordosti koji brzo prerasta u bogoboraåko raspoloæenje kojem se Eva radoznalo podaje i 1 2 3 4 5 6 Vidi: Popoviñ: 1980: 260. svetlosti æivota. bezazlen. 5. Takoœe. Pad bi bio neobjaãnjiv da smo zadræali to stanje moralnog savrãenstva. njegov odnos sa Bogom i uslove u kojima je æiveo. Stvoren po liku Boæijem.3 Ipak.da bi vladao zemljom i svim ãto je na zemlji.2 Imajuñi u vidu svojstva kojima je åovek bio obdaren. prema tome. Netruleænost i besmrtnost telesna ne znaåi nuæno da je. åovekovo savrãenstvo je bilo relativno. åovek je postavljen iznad prirode i predodreœen je da bude posrednik izmeœu Tvorca i beslovesnih biña. i pali u greh.1 Stvoren radi visokog i uzviãenog cilja. svetosti i blaæenstva. Åovekov zadatak nam je nagoveãten u åinjenici da je stvoren po obliåju Boæijem .åovek nije sagreãio. Isto. 6 . Ova obmana je izvedena spretno. bez moguñnosti da umre 4 veñ da je imalo moguñnost da ne umre 5 .

poseban dodatak åovekovim prirodnim silama (lat.“9 Katoliåka crkva insistira na tome da ljudska narav nije potpuno iskvarena. 273. u odnosu na ono ãto je od nje ostalo. veñ „zatamnjen. u odnosu na ono ãto ona predstavlja posle pada.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 71 svesno krãi Boæiju zapovest. odnosno sastavni deo åovekove duhovne i moralne prirode. 272. 302. Pravoslavna antropologija smatra da åovek svojim padom nije u potpunosti izgubio sposobnost duhovnog poimanja. Prvorodni greh je oduzeo Adamu prvobitnu pravednost (lat. Vidi: Isto. jer prirodna teænja razuma i volje prema istini i dobru nije u potpunosti iãåezla. Æena navodi muæa da je u tome sledi i on dobrovoljno jede zabranjeni rod. veñ spoljaãni dar blagodati. ali da nije i izgubljena. odnosno. Stanoviãta se razlikuju u sve tri provenijencije: Pravoslavnoj. ali nije naudio njegovoj prirodi. taånije. Rimokatoliåkoj i Protestanskoj. ili. kao bogolikom sazdanju Boæijem.10 Iako je na prvi pogled sliåna pravoslavnoj. donum superadditum). Vidi: Justin Popoviñ.8 Postoje razliåita stanoviãta po pitanju åovekovog pada. bila povod pogubnog pada prvih ljudi. Vidi: Franc Courth. pre svega. rimokatoliåka antropologija se od nje bitno razlikuje po pitanju ljudske prirode. Kao ãto je zavist œavola prema Bogu bila uzrok njegovom padu na nebu. Prvobitna pravednost nije bila organski. . Prvorodni greh nije u potpunosti uniãtio slobodu åoveka te u njemu i dalje postoji odreœeno dobro kao i sposobnost upravljanja prema dobrom. tako je zavist njegova prema åoveku. da je åovekova sloboda da åini dobro duboko oslabljena.7 Ovom svetopisamskom istinom o poreklu i uzroku greha i zla u svetu proæeta je sræ Svetog predanja. u odnosu na poimanje slike Boæije u åoveku.11 7 8 9 10 11 Vidi: Popoviñ. 1998: 138. Vidi: Tudoran. Obraz Boæiji u åoveku nije u potpunosti izgubljen. 14. justitia originalis).

odnosno. Vidi: Bloesch. F. Veñ se na poåetku starozavetne poruke nazire dinamika razvoja „grehovne sile“ koja pri padu prvosazdanih ljudi dobija svoj zamajac. ali nije nestala.72 Teoloãki åasopis. 1989: 90. 138. nemoguñe da se okrene Bogu svojom voljom. 1989: 90. Bente: 1921: XVIII poglavlje. kasniji uticaj greha na celo stvorenje. poãto je greh zaposeo sve pore njegovog biña. veka. ali nije uniãtena. sledeñi blaæenog Avgustina kaæe „da je åoveku bez Boæije pomoñi nemoguñe åak i poåeti svoj put ka Bogu..14 Augzburãko veroispovedanje.13 Luter je smatrao da je åoveku. sa viãe optimizma.17 Svetopisamsko poimanje praroditeljskog greha U Starom zavetu ne postoji eksplicitno definisan praroditeljski greh. slava Boæija je okrnjena. 1948: 644. Imago Dei je potamnela. u protestantskoj provenijenciji preovladava stanoviãte o potpunoj iskvarenosti ljudske naravi koje prvobitno potiåe od blaæenog Avgustina12 i podrazumeva da je åovek u potpunosti izgubio slobodu i moñ upravljanja prema dobru i ispunjavanja Boæijih zapovesti iz ljubavi prema Bogu. iako tekst implicira njegovu pojavu i posledice.“15 Reformisano veroispovedanje iz 17. Kanoni sa sinode u Dortrehtu 1618-1619: 2007: 51. ãiri se.. N° 9 Nasuprot tome. i poprima sve veñe dimenzije ostavljajuñi posledice zbog kojih trpi sav ljudski rod. tvrdi sledeñe: „U åoveku je preæivelo neko prirodno svetlo koje u njemu åuva neke odreœene spoznaje o Bogu i prirodnim stvarima. 12 13 14 15 16 17 Vidi: Augustine. Vidi: Franc Courth.“16 Ipak. nije sigurno da se ovim prirodnim svetlom moæe doñi do spasonosne spoznaje Boga. niti je njime moguñe obratiti mu se. pogreãno je reñi da je iz åoveka u potpunosti iãåezla prirodna dobrota ili sloboda. meœutim. . Vidi: Bloesch.

2003: 166.23 Misao o univerzalnosti istorije spasenja u Hristu i o nesretnom dogaœaju sa Adamom izrazio je idejom korporativne specifiånosti. Ps 13. 1 Moj 6. 5 (7) definisao dogmu o praroditeljskom grehu. bez izuzetaka. i gle. dok se stihom iz Psalma dokazivalo greãno stanje sveta i åoveka (lat. Savremena egzegeza ovakvo tumaåenje smatra spornim zbog nedostatka konteksta. 167. 5 i 8. kao i greh.“22 Apostol Pavle se ovde bavi Adamom jer mu on otvara moguñnost da govori o uticaju Hrista koji je sveopãti. peccatum originale originatum). 15. Adam predstavlja jedinstvo ljudskog roda. meœu ljudima nema razlike: „Kao ãto je napisano: Nema ni jednog pravednog.“ 18 sa kasnijom konstatacijom: „I Gospod videñi da je nevaljalstvo ljudsko veliko na zemlji. 5-6. 46. 1Car 8. 31. 2-3. sagreãili (1Moj 6.“ 19 Postoje mnoga mesta u Starom zavetu koja direktno svedoåe o tome da su svi ljudi. dobro beãe veoma.20 Tridentski sabor je tekstovima iz 1Moj 3 i Ps 51. 23). . U proroåkoj i mudrosnoj literaturi Starog zaveta se postepeno razvija individualistiåko shvatanje greha i njegovih posledica. druãtvene posledice greha i liånu odgovornost poåinioca – svaki greh je greh protiv Saveza i liåni greh protiv Boga. Po apostolu Pavlu. Uporedi: Rim 5. Vidi: Isto. i bi mu æao u srcu. odnosno.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 73 Uporedimo reåi Stvoritelja na vrhuncu ãestodneva: „Tada pogleda Bog sve ãto je stvorio. pokaja se Gospod ãto je stvorio åoveka na zemlji. peccatum originale originans). Jer 13. a Adamova greãka ukazuje na to da kada je greh u pitanju. 9-10. Vidi: Nemet. i da su sve misli srca njihovog svagda samo zle. 21.21 Pojam praroditeljskog greha je neãto odreœeniji u Novom zavetu. 18 19 20 21 22 23 1 Moj 1. Rim 3. Starozavetna poruka jasno naglaãava dvojnost greha. Stihovima iz 1Moj 3 se dokazivao „uzroåni greh“ kojim je greh uãao u svet (lat.

26 Takvo stanje savrãentsva podrazumeva i åinjenicu da je åovek sazdan kao biñe kojem su bile strane bolesti. Naæalost. Adam nije imao apsolutno spoznajno i moralno savrãenstvo. slobodna volja ljudskog biña postaje oruœe njegovog ropstva. njegova volja savrãenu pravednost i dobrotu. svojom 24 25 26 27 Vidi: Courth. on joã uvek nije bio moralno dovrãena liånost. bol. kako uma. koje su postale delom åovekove prirode nakon njegovog pada u greh i koje su posledica ogrehovljenja same åovekove prirode. tako i volje. patnje. Sv. „izumitelja zla“ kako ga joã naziva Sv. Prevashodno. 6.“25 Stvorio ga je Bog. Zavist jednog od nekada najveñih meœu heruvimima. Grigorije Niski. ali sa moguñnoãñu da sagreãi. U ovome se najbolje oåitava veliåina Boæije intervencije i veliåina Stvoritelja samog.27 Na kraju. slobodno biñe sa moguñnoãñu da odluåuje. N° 9 Adam je predak apostola naroda i tip greãnog åoveåanstva. Njegov um je posedovao brojna znanja. kao biñe koje je posedovalo slobodnu volju. dakle. kao ãto je Hrist predvodnik izbavljenih. åovek je stvoren kao slovesno.24 Istoåna tradicija Pravoslavno uåenje stanje prvosazdanog åoveka objaãnjava na ovaj naåin: „Stanje nevinosti ili odsustva greha … nepoznavanje greha ili nedostatak æelje za ogrehovljenjem… Pre no ãto je sagreãio Adam je bio u stanju harmonije. . bez sklonosti ka grehu. Prvi åovek je bio savrãen u tom smislu ãto je i njegovo duhovno i fiziåko bilo na najviãem stepenu i omoguñavalo mu je da ispuni svoj zadatak. Vidi: Tudoran. Grigorije Niski.74 Teoloãki åasopis. kada najviãem åinu svoga stvaranja daje moguñnost da se okrene od njega. ujedinjenog savrãenstva i pravde. 4. a samim tim slobodnim kada je u pitanju volja. Vidi: Isto. 1998:108. 2001: 208 (poglavlje 26).

on ne podrazumeva apriori i „nasleœenu krivicu“.29 Greãnost ljudske prirode. 287. drvo bi svojom lepotom uvelo njihova srca u rat. Najzad. preneo je svoju palu prirodu na svoje potomstvo. Iako su praroditelji traæili opravdanje za sebe u nagovoru zmije. osiromaãenja i smrtnosti. ."28 Tako nastaje prvi greh. Gospoda Isusa Hrista. da prvosazdani ljudi snose krivicu za grehopad. greh koji je uåinio otac ljudskog roda. veñ podrazumeva osobinu svakog pojedinca da se lakãe upravlja prema zlu nego prema dobru. bolesti. Buduñi da je Adam bio otac celog åoveåanstva. Vidi: Isto. stradanja i smrt.31 Vaæno je reñi da u pravoslavnoj antropologiji nasledni greh nema Avgustinske implikacije. Naslednost prvorodnog greha sveopãta je. projavljuje se u svima bez izuzetka kao neko æivo greãno naåelo. Sveti Jefrem Sirijski kaæe da je Adam u sebi posedovao potencijal za ovakav ishod: „Reå iskuãenja ne bi odvela u greh one ãto su iskuãavani da kuãaåa nije rukovodila njihova sopstvena æelja.njenog ograniåenja. samim tim i greh sa svim svojim posledicama i kaznama . Vidi: Popoviñ.otuda i naziv prvorodni ili praroditeljski greh.30 Na ceo ljudski rod kao deo izmenjene åovekove prirode prenose se i sve posledice pada: unakaæenost lica Boæijeg. jer niko od ljudi nije izuzet od toga osim Bogoåoveka.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 75 ruãilaåkom tendencijom uspeva da zavede ljudsko biñe i tako dovede do promene njegove same prirode . Ovakav prestup Boæije zapovesti poslediåno postaje grehom celog ljudskog roda. Vidi: Isto. mnogo viãe im je naãkodila njihova vlastita æelja nego nagovor zmije. potiåuñi od Adama. 290. ali se ta krivica ne prenosi na potomke. to jest. Åovekov Pad: 3. iskvarenost volje. dakle. 295. œavolje iskuãenje je uspelo zbog toga ãto je on znao (ili je pretpostavljao) ãta se nalazi u srcu samoga åoveka. oskrnavljenost srca. 28 29 30 31 Serafim Rouz. Jasno je. pomraåenje razuma. Åak i da kuãaå nije doãao. kao kategorija i zakon greha koji æivi u åoveku i dejstvuje u njemu i kroz njega.

frustracije. te ih åak ni poznanici ne mogu raspoznati.33 Pad ljudskog biña ontoloãki menja celokupno stvorenje. veñ teæi da je zavede. U fiziåkom smislu. krenuli su putem otuœenosti od Boga i sopstvene prirode. . ljudska biña su postala podloæna bolesti. sliåno onima koji su iz nesmotrenosti upali u blato i ukaljali lice svoje. „pad nije ograniåen samo na ljudski rod. Vidi: Ware. U moralnom smislu. postao je neprijatelj samome sebi. Greh naruãava harmoniju åoveka sa samim sobom. Vidi: Sv. liãio sebe svog dostojanstva upavãi u blato greha. veliko i dragoceno stvorenje. 2001: 40. 35 Kako je to svojevremeno govorio Sv. Grigorije Niski. Grigorije Niski. otuœen tako od samoga sebe i oslabljene volje. åovek postaje rob greha. N° 9 Prestupanjem zapovesti prvosazdani ljudi podlegli su Sataninoj obmani i promaãili svoje prvobitno naznaåenje. 1979: 60. podelu unutar samoga sebe i drugih ljudi. 8. (17:2) Popoviñ. 1980: 282. Liãen zajednice sa Bogom. taãtina i depresija su postale svakodnevnica ljudskog roda.76 Teoloãki åasopis. priroda viãe ne sluæi åoveku. veñ se prostire i na beslovesne æivotinje i na beslovesnu prirodu. podelu izmeœu sebe i prirodnog sveta. on je prouzrokovao podelu. 1979: 59.“34 Posledice pada ljudskog roda bile su fiziåkog i moralnog karaktera. i do oblaåenja u smrtnost. 2001: 121. Vidi: Tudoran.“ 37 32 33 34 35 36 37 Ware.32 Umesto do savrãentstva i oboæenja. izgubio je lik netruleænog Boga i kroz greh se obukao u lik truleæi i praãine. åini to sa naporom. Umesto da igra ulogu posrednika i ujedinitelja. kod ljudskog biña je doãlo do izopaåenja i gubitka dostojanstva koje je bilo ravno anœeoskom. tvrdi pravoslavni bogoslov Kalistos Ver. bolu. sa Bogom i sa prirodom: telo se viãe ne pokorava duãi. a kada mu sluæi. Romanidis.36 „Tako je åovek. Åovek je postao predmet unutraãnjeg otuœenja. starosti i na kraju smrti.

pod tim predpostavkama. .“40 Ljudsko biñe je i dalje sposobno da se opredeljuje prema dobru. postali smrtni i moæemo reñi. i ljudski rod je doæiveo fiziåku smrt. tada se stvara bezizlaz u vezi sa prenoãenjem smrti i propadljivosti na potomke Adamove.“38 Posledica toga je i fiziåka smrt. Romanidis. to je protivno ljudskoj prirodi kojoj je mnogo lakãe da se rukovodi upravo suprotnim. Za razliku od rimokatoliåke antropologije koja unakaæenje lika vidi kao gubitak åovekove „prvobitne pravednosti“.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 77 Poãto se priroda ljudskog biña ontoloãki promenila. veñ. kada je u pitanju pravoslavna antropologija. vrlo je vaæno reñi da nije Bog tvorac smrti veñ œavo. zaklju38 39 40 Serafim Rouz. Da bi se. Bog je dopustio smrt ne zbog nekakvog kaænjeniåkog raspoloæenja boæanske pravednosti. U odnosu na poreklo smrti. ali. saåuvala dobrota Boæija.“39 Ono ãto pravoslavnu antropologiju åini autentiånom i najoptimistiånijom jeste upravo njeno poimanje lika Boæijeg u åoveku nakon grehopada. odnosno. ipak. delimiåno slobodna. Åovekova volja ostaje samo uslovno. 1980: 282. Popoviñ. lik Boæiji u åoveku nije uniãten. posle pada. pre svega. i manje optimistiånih tumaåenja protestanskog stanoviãta „potpune iskvarenosti“. åoveåanstvo po svaku cenu mora biti krivac za pad. Romanidis kaæe sledeñe: „Ako se jednom prihvati da propadljivost i smrt predstavljaju kaznu od Boga za sve ljude. natprirodnog i inputiranog dara koji na taj naåin i nije åinio deo ogranske prirode åoveka. u pravoslavnoj antropologiji. zbog boæanske ljubavi prema åoveku. umrli. veñ naprotiv. primili smrtnu presudu. kako je to rekao ava Justin: „duboko povreœen. 2001: 234. o duhovnoj smrti kada kaæe za prvosazdane ljude da su „u trenutku kad su åuli reåi: prah si i u prah ñeã se vratiti. Sveti Jovan Zlatousti govori. pomraåen i unakaæen. Åovekov Pad: 8. Naglaãavajuñi ovo. Na osnovu ljudske istorije.

Pravoslavna i rimokatoliåka antropologija se podudaraju u tvrdnji da je lik Boæiji u åoveku posle grehopada osiromaãen. te mu je. na prvi pogled. na razliåite naåine gledaju na prirodu ljudskog biña. Åak i u palom svetu. Razmatrajuñi åovekov pad i posledice pada iz perspektive zapadne hriãñanske tradicije i poredeñi ga sa stanoviãtem pravoslavne antropologije. Apostol Pavle. . 41 42 Rim 1. omoguñeno da stupi u zajedniãtvo sa Bogom. protestantskom pogledu na imago Dei. odnosno. åovek je joã uvek sposoban za poærtvovanje i samilost. prema tome. Protestanska antropologija je sliåna pravoslavnoj u odnosu na prirodu åoveka. a razlikuje se od nje u odnosu na posledice pada i dalje soterioloãke implikacije. po milosti Boæijoj. 62. Kalistos Ver kaæe da ona (pravoslavna tradicija) bez umanivanja samih posledica pada ne smatra da je pad rezultirao „totalnom iskvarenoãñu”. povratak na poimanje lika Boæijeg u åoveku je neizbeæan i prvenstveno. Boæanski lik u åoveku. Kada se razmatra problematika pada ljudskog biña. N° 9 åujemo da je åoveku data moguñnost bogopoznanja kako o tome svedoåi i Sv. neophodan. meœutim. åime se podrazumeva da on i dalje poseduje odreœeno bogopoznanje. Vidi: Ware. kako to tvrde neka pesimistiånija kalvinistiåka stanoviãta.78 Teoloãki åasopis. ali u manjoj meri.20. 19 .42 Zapadna tradicija U prethodnim poglavljima je veñ bilo reåi o rimokatoliåkom. nailazimo na manje ili viãe opreåna stanoviãta. Sagledañemo poimanje pada ljudskog biña u greh i njegove posledice sa stanoviãta rimokatoliåke i protestanske antropologije. 41 Sumirajuñi stanoviãte pravoslavne tradicije po ovom pitanju. ukljuåujuñi i slobodu izbora koju on ima. ostao je zamuñen ali ne i uniãten.

prema Avgustinu je u poremeñenom odnosu prema Bogu. Meliton pod nasledstvom podrazumeva nesretno stanje åoveka koje ga podjarmljuje i zavodi na greh. Bit praroditeljskog greha.47 Avgustin polazi od razmiãljanja o crkvenoj praksi krãtenja dece koja podrazumeva da su deca greãnici. jer iako moralno nevina. prema tome. kako jedni smatraju. do suprotne krajnosti.45 Avgustin produbljuje teoloãki smisao pokvarenosti åoveka. Ovom temom su se bavili joã i Sv. O ovome vidi viãe u Justin: 1980: 301-307.43 Veñ u prvim vekovima. Razvio je teoriju o poreklu i naslednosti greha. 46 47 . jer ako je Hrist umro za sve.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 79 Crkvena tradicija Joã krajem drugog veka. 2003: 174.44 U jeku rasprave blaæenog Avgustina sa Pelagijem. 108. dovodeñi ga. po uåenju Pelagija. greh je potpuno sluåajna trenutna pojava koja niåe jedino u oblasti slobodne volje i to poãto se u njoj razvije sloboda koja ga jedina moæe proizvesti. to jest. Irinej Lionski i Tertulian: polazili su od istine da je otkupljenje potrebno svima. Vidi: Nemet: 2003: 173. Pelagije je engleski monah iz åetvrtog veka åije je uåenje proglaãeno jeretiåkim. do taåke kristalizacije. s obzirom da greh zavisi iskljuåivo od slobodne volje. u 43 44 45 Vidi: Isto. Nemet. imaju nasledni greh od kojeg se oslobaœaju krãtenjem. boreñi se protiv markionizma i gnosticizma. onda su svi greãni i svi imaju potrebu za otkupljenjem i spasenjem. Vidi: Justin.46 a kako drugi smatraju. do potpune pokvarenosti åoveka. Greh je ono ãto se moæe izbeñi. Vidi: Courth. åovek moæe biti bez greha. te. 110. shvatanje spasenja i praksa krãtenja su bili uobiåajeno povezani s priznavanjem odreœenog greãnog stanja u kojem se åovek nalazi. Meliton Sardski govori o grehu koji je ljudski rod nasledio od Adama. bez uticaja Boæanskog. 1980: 300. Ãtaviãe. greh nije neãto supstancijalno i ne pripada prirodi åoveka. åovek je i dalje u moguñnosti da bira izmeœu dobra i zla. Po Pelagiju.

kako „razjedninjenje åoveka. imalo presudan znaåaj i veliki uticaj. povezano s duãevnom smrñu.49 Avgustinova nauka o praroditeljskom grehu suãtinski se svodi na åinjenicu da åovek „dolazi na svet obeleæen.“ 50 Kao takav. praroditeljski greh podrazumeva. Vidi: Courth.52 Nesumnjivo je da je na oba sabora Avgustinovo shvatanje praroditeljskog greha. Sabor na kojem se dalje razvijalo stanoviãte zapadne crkve o praroditeljskom grehu bio je sabor u Oranæu 529. ne moæemo pozvati na odgovornost.80 Teoloãki åasopis. 48 49 50 51 52 Vidi: Courth. Isto. 114. godine u Kartagini.“ tako i kaznu koju je Stvoritelj. N° 9 oholosti i samoljublju. 207.48 Hiponski biskup. ne samo nekom opãtom pokvarenoãñu koja mu prethodi. Na crkvenom saboru je bilo prihvañeno nekoliko kanona i odluka koje su se odnosile na pojam i shvatanje praroditeljskog greha. Vidi: Scola. nametnuo svim ljudima. 116. zbog Adamove neposluãnosti. 1998: 111. govori o poæudi koja se smatra nasledstvom od prvosazdanog åoveka i samim tim i izvorom liånih greha. i za koju ga.51 Sabori u Kartagini i Oranæu Teoloãka rasprava sa Pelagijem i njegovim uåenjem dovela je do sazivanja crkvenog sabora afriåkih crkava 418. Vidi: Isto. Prades. koje je na ovim saborima i zvaniåno prihvañeno. na osnovu uverenja o greãnom stanju u kojem se nalazi svaki Adamov potomak. Marengo. godine na koji ñe se skoro hiljadu godina kasnije pozivati na Tridentskom saboru. Sabor je pre svega posmatrao odnos ranjene prirode ljudskog biña i milosti spasenja. veñ i realno greãnim biñem koje u njemu postoji i kojim se unapred odreœuje za veånu osudu. premda ga ona uslovljava. 2003: 206. .

poãto je Adam uzor åovekovog morala i predstavnika celog åoveåantsva. sve ljude stavlja u poloæaj neprijateljstva prema Bogu.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 81 Nakon sabora u Oranæu vekovima nije postojalo veñe interesovanje za problematiku praroditeljskog greha ali je izvesno interesovanje u srednjem veku formiralo stav da se prisutnost sluåajne pokvarenosti ljudske naravi. Toma Akvinski ulogu prvobitne milosti vidi kao ravnoteæu 53 54 55 56 57 Vidi: Scola. Toma Akvinski. Isto. sledeñi Anselma iz Aoste i koristeñi se skolastiåkom terminologijom. Gubitak prvobitne milosti predstavlja formalnu prirodu praroditeljskog greha. koja.Akvinski razum i intelekt smatra duãevnim elementima koji su usmereni prema dobru dok je „niæi“ deo duãe usmeren ka zlu. Vidi. predstavlja gubitak sklada duãevnih elemenata . 53 Toma Akvinski U 13. Vidi: Isto. Praroditeljski greh predstavlja. definisao je praroditeljski greh kao sintezu dva elementa: potpunog gubitka54 izvorne ili prvobitne pravednosti55 kao formalnoga elementa i poæude kao materijalnog elementa. kao materijalni element. Marengo. 1954: 124. 120. Takoœe. 208. 57 Vaæno je spomenuti i ulogu „prvobitne“ pravednosti u åoveku. 124. kako ga joã Akvinski naziva. veku jedan on najveñih teologa katoliåke crkve. Svaka poæuda. Vidi: Fairweather. na stvarnost praroditeljskog greha se gleda i kao na moralnu solidarnost ljudskog roda sa Adamom.56 Formalna priroda praroditeljskog greha je odreœena njegovim uzrokom koji je suprotan prvobitnoj milosti koja se sastoji iz posluãnosti ljudskog biña Boæijoj volji. . Prades. prepoznaje u prisutnosti poæude. 121. poåevãi od Adama. umrtvljenost ljudske prirode. Vidi: Isto.

Vidi: Bloesh. nakon grehopada povreœena. odnosno. Greh zahvata sve pore ljudskog biña i onemoguñava mu da se okrene Bogu sopstvenom voljom. Luter i Kalvin gledali su na stvarnost praroditeljskog greha kao na silu koja je u potpunosti ovladala ljudskim biñem. N° 9 izmeœu duãevnih elemenata (razum. 302. Vidi: Calvin. 1989: 91. Vidi: Popoviñ.58 Imajuñi ovo u vidu. pioniri reformacije. po Akvinskom.61 a njegovu pokvarenost kao „duboku i zlu“. njegovim umom. bez Boæije intervencije. kako bi onda priroda nakon grehopada mogla da ostane u neizmenjenom stanju? Da li to znaåi da se ljudsko biñe nakon grehopada vraña u svoje prirodno stanje. u jeku reformacije. problematika praroditeljskog greha dobija drugaåiji naglasak.60 Luter je opisao åoveka zarobljenog grehom kao incurvatus-a (savijen prema sebi). veku. . 1957: 261. zakljuåujemo da justitia originalis po Akvinskom nije bila organski deo ljudske prirode. Isto: 96.82 Teoloãki åasopis. Sledeñi blaæenog Avgustina. stanje bez blagodati?59 Tomistiåko viœenje praroditeljskog greha je nesumljivo ostavilo traga na veliki Sabor koji ñe uslediti nekoliko vekova kasnije. intelekt i niæi delovi duãe). ili je samo izmenjena njena moguñnost da se usmerava ka dobrom.62 Ljudsko biñe se raœa pokvareno. 126. Reformacija U 16. jer ako jeste. i na hamartiologiju Katoliåke crkve upãte. Nije jasno da li je priroda åoveka. Treñi ålan treñeg poglavlja kanona sa sabora u Dortu glasi ovako: 58 59 60 61 62 Vidi: Isto. i svim njegovim delima. srcem. Da li bi bilo potrebno stavljati elemente u ravnoteæu da „niæi“ deo duãe nije i pre Adamovog pada bio usmeren ka zlu? Da li je doctor Angelicus ukazao na manihejski dualizam ljudske prirode i pre njegovog pada.

i time otklanja prokletstvo greha sa ljudskog biña.64 Reåi osmog poglavlja Drugog Helvetskog veropispovedanja imaju radikalniji prizvuk: „Puni zloñe (=ljudi). . civilis justitia). niti se mogu vratiti Bogu. veñ poniãtava njegovo pripisivanje åoveku. 94. veñ je samo potamnela.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet „Svi ljudi su zaåeti u grehu i raœaju se kao sinovi gneva. 1959: 500. niti mogu ispraviti izopaåenu narav i tu doneti poboljãanje. moguñnost da i dalje razumom u svakodnevnom æivotu 63 64 Kanoni sa sinoda u Dordrechtu. Barth.deo slike Boæije je ostao u ljudskoj prirodi. 1953. osude i mrænje prema Bogu. 137. suprotno katoliåkom uåenju. umrli u grehu i robovi greha. Karl Bart opisuje åoveka kao „korenito i potpuno pokvarenog“. nesposobni za svako spasonosno delo. http://www. Bez milosti Duha Svetoga koji preporaœa.htm 66 67 68 Brunner. a ne samo jedan njen deo66 . ne æele. dodavãi pritom. nismo u moguñnosti sami od sebe da åinimo. nepoverenja. veñ je u nemoguñnosti da usmerava åoveka da iãta uradi u pogledu svog spasenja bez uticaja Boæanske spasonosne milosti. skloni zlu. da krãtenje ne poniãtava krivicu praroditeljskog greha.67 a ipak smatra da slika Boæija nije nestala iz åoveka.“65 Bruner smatra da je greh promenio i izopaåio celokupnu ljudsku prirodu. odnosno. i volja ljudskog biña nije u potpunosti zarobljena.sa- 65 Drugo Helvetsko veroispovedanje. 2007: 50. cred-texts. Vidi: Catholic Encyclopedia. Concupiscense.“63 83 Luter je definisao znaåenje reåi concupiscentia neãto drugaåije.com/chr/2helvcnf.68 Takoœe. Bloesh. kao izopaåenje ljudske prirode i kao samu suãtinu ljudskog greha. åak ni da mislimo ni o åemu dobrom. Åovek i dalje poseduje takozvanu graœansku pravednost (lat.

1976. kao i imago Dei. Stanoviãte protestanske provenijencije. imago Dei u åoveku jeste oãteñena ali ona joã uvek postoji. Vidi: Bloesh: 90. Isto. odnosno. 69 Potpuna pokvarenost predstavlja rezultat pada ljudskog biña u greh. ali istovremeno naglaãava da ljudsko biñe nije pokvareno u celosti. a posebno Kalvinizma. ålan Augzburãkog veroispovedanja. Suãtina razumevanja pojma je u razlikovanju potpunog od apsolutnog. iako je moguñnost ove spoznaje svedena na minimum.70 Nasuprot tome. Opãta milost omoguñava odreœene spoznaje o Bogu. N° 9 delimiåno razlikuje dobro i zlo. Ãta je taåno obuhvañeno ovim pojmom? Potrebno je pojaãnjenje ovog pojma da bismo izbegli njegovo radikalno razumevanje. te razlikuje izmeœu onoga ãto je åasno i neåasno. ãto pruæa objaãnjenje za delimiåno Bogopoznanje. joã uvek poseduje sposobnost za spoznaju pravednosti. kako o tome svedoåi 11. Herman. Ovakvo tumaåenje radikalizuje pojam potpune pokvarenosti i ne predstavlja suãtinu poruke koju su Kalvin i kasnije sabor u Dortu ispovedali.84 Teoloãki åasopis. po pitanju praroditeljskog greha se najåeãñe povezuje sa pojmom potpune pokvarenosti. Kanoni sa sinode u Dordrechtu. 50. Ona podrazumeva da je svaki deo ljudskog biña oãteñen grehom. doprinose tome da ljudsko biñe. Dakle.“72 Opãta Boæija milost.71 U ljudskom biñu je preæivelo neko prirodno svetlo: „Zahvaljujuñi tome. kao i za moralna naåela koja se 69 70 71 72 Hanko. Van Baren. ono åuva neke odreœene spoznaje o Bogu i prirodnim stvarima. i pokazuje neko nastojanje oko kreposti i discipline. . za delove mudrosti i istina koje su prisutne u nehriñanskim religijama. okrnjena je ali nije uniãtena. apsolutna pokvarenost implicira iskvarenost ljudskog biña u celini (u njemu ne ostaje ni trunke dobra) i nemoguñnost razlikovanja dobra od zla.

savremeni protestanski teolog. 50. Donald Bloã.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 85 mogu videti u kulturama najstarijih civilizacija. govorio je Luter. i zadræati ga u nepravdi. iz Boæijeg ugla. odraz Boæijeg biña u åoveku. i naprotiv.. 95. Åovek je i dalje odgovoran pred Bogom. iako je njegova sloboda znaåajno oslabljena i oãteñena. 91. Bloesh. pa samim tim. sva njegova dobra dela zaraæena su greãnom motivacijom ili namisli. Govoriti o apsolutnoj iskvarenosti kao opãtem stanoviãtu unutar protestantizma bilo bi suviãe jednostrano.“76 73 74 75 76 Vidi: Bloesh: 91. ali ne i Boga. Bloesh. jer se okrenuo od Boga da bi postigao vlastite ciljeve. jer se åovek ne koristi ispravno prirodnim i graœanskim stvarima. odliåno je defisao sloæenu postavku kompleskne teoloãke postavke: „Imago Dei. ona neprihvatljiva. . pokuãava na razliåite naåine ugasiti ovo svetlo.73 Ovo svetlo ipak nije dovoljno za dolaæenje do Bogopoznanja koje vodi ka spasenju: „Ali nije sigurno da se s ovim prirodnim svetlom moæe doñi do spasonosne spoznaje Boga niti je moguñe njemu se obratiti.75 Postoji izvesna polarizovanost stanoviãta protestantskih teologa po pitanju shvatanja ljudske prirode posle grehopada. ipak. i tako dok neãto åini. Kanoni sa sinode u Dordrechtu. åovek je æalosno okrnjen biser. ali nije uniãten. jer celo njegovo biñe odraæava slavu njegovog Stvoritelja.. biti bez isprike pred Bogom“74 Buduñi da je ljudsko biñe delimiåno u moguñnosti da åini dela pravednosti i da doœe do odreœenog stepena moralnih vrlina. Ljudskom pravednoãñu se moæe steñi poãtovanje i divljenje ljudi. Åitav åovek je biser. naruãen je.

21.78 U 1. naglaãavaju da se praroditeljski greh prenosi i odnosi na celo åoveåanstvo. kanonu crkveni oci. nego da je za to potrebna i vera pojedinca. vraña åoveka u odnos prijateljstva sa Bogom. .79 U 2.86 Teoloãki åasopis. veka. Luter je smatrao da krãtenje ne briãe u potpunosti praroditeljski greh. 21. sredinom 16. kanonu se razmatra Luterovo poimanje krãtenja 81 i nasuprot Luteru. Vidi: Courth. 141. Nemet. kanonu ispoveda se da se praroditeljski greh ne prenosi oponaãanjem. juna 1546. U 5. Apostola Pavla.82 Krãtenje. odræan je Tridentski77 sabor. Isto.83 U 6. kanonu se istiåe vaænost krãtenja dece. prema tome. 2003: 180. 140. U 4.84 Tridentski sabor je bio od velikog znaåaja za poimanje praroditeljskog greha i za razvoj æivota unutar Katoliåke crkve dobar deo Sabora je bio posveñen raspravama o crkvenim tajnama. Waterworth: 1848. Italija. N° 9 Tridentski Sabor Kao odgovor na teoloãke i eklesioloãke izazove Reformacije. Vidi: Courth. Na saboru je 17. veñ potomstvom i poreklom. Vidi: Nemet. sabor naglaãava kako ova sveta tajna u potpunosti i u njegovoj biti briãe praroditeljski greh. 184. J. Ni na jednom drugom saboru do tada nije bilo potrebe za odluåivanjem o tako vaænim pitanjima pod tako teãkim okolnostima. sledeñi Sv. izmeœu 1545-1563. kanonu se istiåe neutralan stav u odnosu na bezgreãno zaåeñe Majke Boæije. godine proglaãeno 6 kanona o praroditeljskom grehu. kanonu dekreta sabor se odreœuje prema tradiciji anselmovsko – tomistiåkog poimanja praroditeljskog greha kao gubitka iskonske svetosti i pravednosti. Tridentski sabor je naglasio naåelnu neophodnost spasenja svih ljudi 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 Danaãnji Trento. godine.80 U 3.

odnosno Adam. razvoja prirodnih nauka. primera radi. donekle je smanjio teoloãke tenzije izmeœu Katoliåke crkve i Protestantizma. 185. i da se taj greh preneo na celo njegovo potomstvo. veka.85 Savremena shvatanja praroditeljskog greha Krajem 19. Takoœe. naizgled suprostavljene strane. 2003. ponovo se budi interesovanje za pojmom praroditeljskog greha. zbog novih erminevtiåkih pristupa. ålanu je potvrœen monogenizam i åinjenica da Adam nije metaforiåki prikaz viãe parova i snaæno je naglaãena åinjenica da je greh poåinio pojedinac. ålan 37. 143. godine. u 36. Vidi: Isto.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 87 i znaåaj krãtenja kao svete tajne koja briãe praroditeljski greh (sa ostatkom poæude kao posledice praroditeljskog greha). nauånog objaãnjenja porekla æivota na zemlji i stvaranja sveta uopãte. ålanu enciklike istiåe da je moguñe da ljudsko telo ima svoj evolutivni poredak. kao i zbog mnogih arheoloãkih otkriña. ali da je za stvaranje åovekove duãe zasluæan samo Bog. i poåetkom 20. novih filosofskih tendencija i poimanja sveta. U ovakvom druãtvenom stanju svesti mnogi bogoslovi su traæili put ka sintezi verskih istina i dostignuña savremene nauke. ålan 36. Tako se.88 85 86 87 88 Vidi: Isto. poziva bogoslove da pokuãaju da pomire nauåno i versko shvatanje porekla æivota. Spremao se novi izazov za teologiju: na koji naåin odgovoriti na savremena nauåna pitanja i da li je moguñe pomiriti ove dve.87 U 37. . Vidi: Nemet. Vidi: Humani Generis. papa Pije XII u svojoj enciklici pod nazivom „Humani generis“.86 Joã 1950.

da bude pred Bogom. 1982: 111.94 Posledice pada i iskvarenosti ljudske prirode prenose se na celokupno stvorenje95 kao i na sve 89 Odræan izmeœu 1962 . otvorio ga je Papa Jovan XXIII. ali bez Boga. . 90 91 92 93 94 95 Gaudium et Spes.“93 Posledice pada su gubitak prvobitne pravednosti i iskvarenost slike Boæije u åoveku. N° 9 Drugi vatikanski sabor89 se nije posebno osvrtao na pitanje praroditeljskog greha. ålan 13. Isto. Katehizam definiãe sadræaj praroditeljskog greha kao gubitak poverenja u Stvoritelja. zatvorio Papa Pavle VI.91 Veliki znaåaj pojmu praroditeljskog greha nesumnjivo daje i Katehizam Katoliåke Crkve. joã jednom naglaãava nemoguñnost åoveka da se bori protiv zla u sebi bez Boæije pomoñi. ali ne i u saglasnosti sa njim. Vidi: Cathehism of Catholic Church. Vidi: Isto.88 Teoloãki åasopis. izmeœu svetlosti i tame.1965. zloupotrebu date slobode i neposluãnost prema Boæijoj zapovesti. Rahner. vaæan dokument sa kraja proãlog veka koji je okupio najvaænije bogoslove Katoliåke crkve. ålan 398. Vaæno je spomenuti i miãljenje Karla Ranera. 1993: ålan 397. pa se ni liåna Adamova krivica ne moæe na nas preneti.“90 Takoœe. Vidi: Isto. veñ je njegovu formulaciju ostavio u okvirima koji su utvœeni na Tridentskom saboru. ålan 399. godine.92 Åovek je pao u okrilje greha voœen æeljom „da bude kao Bog. jer ona predstavlja delo liåne slobode pojedinca (=Adama) u kojoj je osoba jedinstvena i niko ne moæe da zauzme njeno mesto. Formulacija Sabora o praroditeljskom grehu je kratka i jasna i joã jednom naglaãava podeljenost åovekove prirode. ålan 400. biña u kome se vodi „dramatiåna borba izmeœu dobra i zla. velikog bogoslova Katoliåke crkve iz proãloga veka. koji je joã jednom naglasio vaænost åinjenice da Adamov greh ne moæe biti inputiran u nas.

iako je oãteñena. prihvatajuñi stanoviãta opreåna crkvenom uåenju kao opãte prihvañene normative. nihilistiåkih i naturalistiåkih svetonazora zahtevaju ozbiljan pristup i odgovor od strane hriãñanskih provenijencija. 98 99 . Vidi o tome viãe: Concupiscense. kao i njihov zajedniåki dijalog sa protestanskim denominacijama.98 Drugim reåima. Pribliæavanje bogoslovskih stavova Pravoslavne i Rimokatoliåke crkve. stavljaju danaãnje bogoslove pred novi i nimalo lak zadatak. Nema sumnje da savremena sekularizacija druãtva i devijacija moralno – kulturnih normi i obrazaca. http://www.htm Vidi: Isto. on ne nosi i liånu krivicu za Adamov greh. Catholic Encyclopedia. 96 97 Vidi: Isto. odgovora na izazove koje pruæa postmodernistiåko druãtvo. 2003: 189. u buduñnosti. ålan 405. odnosno. da doprinese i novim pogledima na shvatanje praroditeljskog greha.96 Iako se greh prenosi na sve potomke.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 89 Adamove potomke. kao i generalizovanju jednog svehriãñanskog stanoviãta.org/cathen/04208a. ranjena i teæi97 ka grehu. ålan 402. Niske pobude suprotne razumu. izazovi egzistencijalistiåkih. greh je nasleœen ali ne i poåinjen.newadvent. ljudska priroda nije u potpunosti iskvarena. Nemet. moæe. Latinska reå concupiscentia oznaåa unutraãnju teænju i sklonost ljudskog biña da åini greh.99 Izazovi u vidu najnovijih nauånih dostignuña i savremene kulture koja teæi ka tome da trivijalizuje i relazivizuje pojam greha uopãte.

Barth. John 1957. Bente and W. Œakovo: Forum bogoslova. Courth. T. Beograd: Biblioteka Obraz Svetaåki. M 1954. Novi Sad: Dobra Vest. Donald 1989. Christian Classics Ethereal Library.VA: John Knox Press. Novi Sad: Dobra Vest. Osnove evanœeoske teologije 1. Concordia Publishing House. The Humanity of God Richmond. Brunner. Grand Rapids. G. Nature and grace: Selections from the Summa Theologica of Thomas Aquinas Philadephia. A. Lutheran Church St. Fairweather. . The Institutes of the Christian Religion. O stvaranju åoveka. Dau 1921. Grigorije Niski. Sveti 2001. The Westiminster Press. Bloesh. The Christian Doctrine of Creation and Redemption. F. Krãñanska antropologija. Emil 1953. G. Karl 1959. MI.90 Teoloãki åasopis. N° 9 CITIRANA DELA Bloesh. Franc 1998. Osnove evanœeoske teologije 2. Calvin. Triglot Concordia: The Symbolical Books of the Ev. Donald 1989. Louis. Philadelphia:The Westminster Press. H.

Teologija stvaranja. Prades 2003. Zagreb. New Ed. adresa: www. Åovekov Pad. Stanje åoveka pre i posle pada. Osijek. Rahner. Ladislav 2003. Manastir Kelije. Karl 1982. Dogmatika Pravoslavne Crkve 2. Ålanak u elektronskom formatu. Reformed Free Publishing Association. Jovan 2001.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 91 Hanko.org Nemet. Praroditeljski greh. Five Points of Calvinism Michigan. Popoviñ. Van Baren 1976. Herman. Krãñanska Sadaãnjost. Fundations of Christian Faith. Manastir Kelije.verujem. Rouz. Dogmatika Pravoslavne Crkve 1. Herder & Herder. Beograd. Ålanak u elektronskom formatu. Beograd. Åovjek kao osoba.org Romanidis. Novi Sad: Beseda. Dimitrije 2007. Justin 1980. Isidor 2003. Popoviñ. Serafim nd. Kanoni sa sinode u Dorthrehtu 1618 – 1619. Miliñ. Zagreb. Marengo. Novi Sad: Krãñanski centar „Dobroga Pastira“ i Teoloãki fakultet – Novi Sad. Tudoran. Jasmin. Krãñanska Sadaãnjost. Popadiñ. Scola. www. .verujem. Justin 1980.

92

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

Ware, Kallistos 1979. The Orthodox Way New York, St Vladimirs Seminary Press. Pope, Hugh T. 1910. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume VII. New York, Robert Appleton Company. Nihil Obstat. Palmieri A. 1911. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XI, New York: Robert Appleton Company. Nihil Obstat. Pope Pius XII 1950. Humani Generis: Encyclical of Popr Pius XII, Vatican, http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/ documents/hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis_en.html Pope Poul VI 1965. Gaudium et Spes: Pastoral constitution n the church in the modern world, Vatican, http://www.vatican.va/ archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_co ns_19651207_gaudium-et-spes_en.html Waterworth, J. 1848. The Council of Trent: The canons and decrees of the sacred and oecumenical Council of Trent, London, Dolman.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

93

PECCATUM ORIGINALE – COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE Resume:
There are considerable differencies related to understanding of the original sin in three major christian traditions: Eastern Orthodox, Romancatholic and Protestant. Eastern orthodox anthropology presumes that man did not lost ability of spiritual understanding after the fall, but Gods image (icon) still resides, although corrupted. Roman Catholic tradition insists that human nature is not totally corrupted although ability to do good is deeply weakened, but not completely lost. Although at first glance similar to the Orthodox, Roman Catholic anthropology differs significantly in terms of understanding human nature, mainly because of introduction of the concept donum superadditum. In contrast, prevailing Protestant view stands on pesimistic Augustiniane viewpoint of total depravity. Key words: original sin, imago Dei, peccatum originale originans, donum superadditum

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet Sergej Beuk Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

95 UDK 22.08:230.11 Primljeno: 5.03.2010 Prihvañeno 10.5.2010 Originalni nauåni rad

OSNOVNE BIBLIJSKE VERE
U radu na temu povezanosti biblijske vere i æivota, autor pruæa moguñe odgovore na pitanja: ãta je religijska vera i koji su elementi biblijskog verskog koncepta? Promiãljajuñi o savremenosti kao o krizi verskog identiteta, rad nam donosi osnovne teoloãke premise hriãñanskog koncepta Boæije egzistencije u svetu kroz pojmove kao ãto su ’’opãta vera’’ i ’’dar vere’’, bez kojih nije moguñe prepoznati Boæiju prisutnost u i meœu ljudima. Takoœe, analizom teksta iz tradicionalnog reformisanog (kalvinistiåkog) dokumenta ’’Belgijskog veroispovedanja’’autor iznosi tezu da hristologija protestantsko – evanœeoskog tipa ima korene u teologiji Æana Kalvina i ostalih reformisanih mislilaca. Kljuåne reåi: Religija, Biblija, vera, Bog, Hristos, Sveti Duh, teologija darova, dar vere.

Uvod
Od kada postoji, ljudsko biñe stoji pred jednim od temeljnih pitanja egzistencije koje glasi: ko je Bog i ãta je religijska vera? Da li je to samo verovanje u natprirodno, nevidljivo i samodovoljno biñe ili se religijsko, kao specifiåno versko iskustvo, moæe konkretizovati? Zaãto postoje razliåiti religijski sistemi i da li svi svedoåe o istom fenomenu? Po åemu je Biblija drugaåija od drugih religijskih spisa?

96

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

U XIX, a naroåito u XX veku moæemo primetiti intelektualnu teænju za sintetizacijom (ili, bolje reñi, sinkretizacijom) razliåitih i åesto nespojivih religiskih sistema: od pojave teozofskog pokreta (kao formalne preteåe Nju Ejdæa), preko antropozofije, spiritizma i razliåitih tantriåkih kultova, pa do pokuãaja hinduizacije Zapada, kroz vaiãnizam – kriãnaizam, meditativne tehnike i jogu, razliåita panteistiåka i/ili pananteistiåka uåenja i intenzive prosvetljenja, savremeni åovek pokuãava da se izbavi iz krletke besmisla, alijenacije i smrti. Meœutim, da li smo posle svega na pragu odgovora? Da li smo sreñniji i bliæi istini? Da li je svet postao bolje mesto za æivot? Veñ dvadeset vekova Hristos poziva ljude na veru pokajanja i preumljenja; na promenu svesti srca i ljubav prema bliænjima reåima: ’’Evo stojim na vratima i kucam: ako ko åuje glas moj i otvori vrata, uñi ñu k njemu i veåerañu s njime, i on sa mnom.’’ (Otk. 3, 20) On åeka da mu otvorimo vrata i pozovemo na agape – gozbu, u sigurnosti iskrene i istinske biblijske vere.

Definicije religijske vere
Ako poœemo od najopãtije definicije da je religija ’’...odnos izmeœu nas i Biña izvan nas’’ (Everett, 2009: 10), onda religijska vera predstavlja specifiåan oblik poverenja/pouzdanja u Vrhovnu Realnost – u Boga ili bogove.1 U tom pravcu idu i sledeñe definicije religijske vere: ona je ’’...verovanje, razumevanje i oboæavanje Vrhovnog Uma i Volje koja usmerava Vaseljenu i odræava moralni odnos sa ljudima.’’ (Marlineau, 1888: 15). Moæemo primetiti da autor smatra da je religijska vera nemoguña bez kognitivnog i etiåkog aspekta, kojima se odgoneta Volja Tvorca i ostvaruje neraskidiv odnos sa tvorevinom. Ona je i voljno istraæivanje Istine,2 unutraãnji
1

Vidi: Schaff, Philip, New Schaff – Hercog Encycopledia of Religious Knowledge, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, 1954.

2 Vidi: Hexham, Irving, Concise Dictionary of Religion, Regent College Press, Vancouver, 1999.

koja veoma specifiåno opisuje problem definisanja religijske vere: ’’Vera je ona saglasnost koju dajemo neåijem predlogu. U ’’Enciklopoediji religije i druãtva’’ moæemo proåitati da je religijska vera sistem verovanja. razvija odnos sa tom stvarnoãñu i 3 4 Vidi: Encyclopedia Britannica. Encyclopedia of Psychology and Religion. William. naroåito internet. oseñanja i fenomena – od afriåkog fetiãizma. do islama. sa drugim ljudima i celom planetom. 2007: 445) I pored iznetog.4 Zakljuåujemo da religijska vera: ’’ . Vidi: Leeming. to je stav åije prihvatanje nije motivisano bilo kakvim unutrasnjim dokazom. Stanton. Kathryn and Marlan.. niti razliåite kontekstualizacijske religijske forme verovanja. 1851: 180). Encyclopedia of Religion and Society. dok bi sa druge. New York. bez posebnog zahteva za razumskim i kritiåkim delovanjem.5 dok Hil. vec autoritetom ili svedoåenjem nekog drugog koji je otkriva ili se na nju poziva’’ (Buck. David. Madden.. Vidi: Swatos. uviœamo koliko je naã zadatak teæak. godine. Iako u mnogo åemu prevaziœena. 1998. definicija religijske vere. uviœamo teãkoñu definisanja vere: ona.obuhvata celokupan æivot koji je u odgovarajuñoj vezi sa Bogom. 2009. Za autora je vera svedoåanstvo drugog u kome se ona iznenada otvara za nas. Kniter i Madæets zakljuåuju da religijska vera:’’. Lanham.. 5 .nalazi svoju istinitost u ultimativnoj stvarnosti. AltaMira Press. mora obuhvatiti razliåitost religijskih iskustava. 2007. Springer.’’ (Nickoloff.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 97 stav i posebno uverenje3 koje podrazumeva transpersonalni odnos åiji je izvor u Bogu. Na ovom mestu preneo bih misao Åarlsa Buka iz 1851. Encyclopedia Britannica Inc. s jedne strane.. Ako tu dodamo i savremene komunikoloãke standarde i medije. preko lamaistiåkog budizma. ne zanemarujuñi istoriju religija. Espin. pogotovu u smislu opãte sekularizacije kakva je danas na delu. trebalo da se uhvati u koãtac sa postmodernim shvatanjem Svetog.. predstavlja temelj za miãljenje mnogih da je religioznost a priori iracionalna i samo mistiåka delatnost duha. istini koju ne sagledavamo sopstvenim razumom i iskustvom. bez stvarnog uåeãña misaonog. prakse i kontinuiranog samoposmatranja koje se reflektuje na ponaãanje i stavove. ovako izneta.

je predstavljena kao dar Svetog Duha. Howard – Snyder. dañemo i svoju definiciju religijske vere: ona je specifiåan oblik svesnosti koji podrazumeva veru u Boga. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Takav Bog – milosrdan i svemoguñ – jeste poåetna taåka u razumevanju religijske vere Starog i Novog zaveta.98 Teoloãki åasopis.veñ ono ãto Bog o sebi objavljuje’’ (Lewis. 1997: 3). vera podrazumeva slobodu miãljenja i izbor æivotnog stava. Gospod je.. Faith. Knitter. obznanjuje i poziva: ’’Ne sme biti zaboravljeno da je za bibijsku veru krucijalno ne ono ãto o Bogu åovek govori. Pateñi. od uopãtavanja. 1953: 113).6 Iako neiscrpna kao tema. Bogonadahnuti tekst Biblije zapoåinje æivot u okviru civilizacije s jednom jasnom namerom – ocrtavanjem ljudskom rodu Boæijeg plana spasenja koje se ostvaruje verom: ’’U Novom zavetu vera. druãtvu i istoriji. na æalost. tako. Madges. time. a ne delo ljudske mudrosti. u ovom trenutku.. 1995: 34). Jeff. kao Tvorca ljudi i Univerzuma. Ne smemo. odnosto. plod izabranja i posebnog 6 Vidi: Jordan. a posebno onih koje iznose Isus Hristos i Njegovi apostoli. 1996. zaobiñi ni problem slobodne volje koja nalazi svoje mesto u verskom. Biblijski oblik religijske vere jeste spiritualna manifestacija Njegove Svevolje koja poseduje dve komponente: veru u Boga i veru u Njegovu Reå. po sebi. kojom se Bog otkriva. Thomas. Lanham. Definicije biblijske vere Biblijska vera je izraz koji se koristi za definisanje Svetopisamskog uåenja. apsolutni Kreator neba i zemlje i Odræavalac kreacije. Biblija. . religijska vera je neophodni i poåetni åinilac razumevanja fenomena religijskog (Svetog) u åoveku. Daniel. N° 9 pokreñe ljude da prihvate naåin æivota koji proishodi iz takvog odnosa’’ (Hill. Freedom and Rationality. koji se otkrio ljudskom rodu svojom logosnom prirodom kroz Sveto pismo. ãto podvlaåe Flinova i Tomasova: ’’ Religijska vera je jedinstven izbor verovanja u Boga i æivljenja u odnosu sa Njim’’ (Flynn. postaje Boæija jedinstvena objava. kao stalno aktuelan i aktivan princip.

6). Ona je potpuno poverenje u . Ona je i poåetak biblijski usmerenog æivota. spasenju. opravdavajuña vera. biblijska vera nije samo postignuñe ljudskog biña koje traga za Bogom. posredniåka vera. potvrda Boæije promisli i naåin soterioloãkog ostvarivanja. 1999: 307). Pravednost Boæija se odnosi na sve izabrane vernike i ne zavisi od ljudskih æelja ili htenja (Post. 1. usinovljenju. Spasavajuña vera usmerena je na iskupljujuñu ærtvu Isusa Hrista kao Gospoda i Spasitelja. Doktrinarna ili opãta vera se odnosi na osnovna uåenja Svetog pisma i predstavlja polaziãte svih daljih versko – teoloãkih razmatranja.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 99 otkrivenja koje ljudsko srce nije samo osmislilo’’ (Berkhof. veñ primarno Boæiji neposredovani akt u bogotragaocu koji je spreman za primanje takvog milosrdnog poklona. odobravanje i liåno poverenje’’ (Grudem. 1979: 1). vera nije moguña i da znanje mora pratiti odreœeno oseñanje. mi ñemo se u tekstu ograniåiti na osnovne vrste vere koje moæemo nañi u Svetom pismu: 1. 15. Biblijska vera. jesu elementi doktrinarne vere bez kojih hriãñanstvo uopãte ne bi bilo moguñe (Jd. posveñenja i ljubavi. znanja i razumevanja’’ (Hodgson.3). 1. crkvi i sl. Posredniåka vera podrazumeva sposobnost razumevanja Boæanskog delovanja u nama. 2001: 19). doktrinarna vera. spasavajuña vera. 29).. 3. Istine o Svetoj Trojici. dnevna vera i 6 dar vere. Jasno je da bez izraæene emotivistiåke crte.vera je vrsta miãljenja. ali da li je to dovoljno? Grudem i Parsvel odgovaraju: ’’Prava spasavajuña vera ukljuåuje znanje. kako vidimo. ali i da je vernik opravdan pred Njim i Njegovom svetom voljom. Vrste biblijske vere Iako postoji mnogo razliåitih podela. podrazumeva shvatanje poruke Pisma. Opravdavajuña vera poåiva na uverenju da je Bog pravedan. Kao ãto moæemo razumeti. 5. kojeg ne moæe biti bez jasnog sagledavanja Njegove volje kroz Reå i zato Hodæson naglaãava: ’’. Purswell.. Ona je uvek individualno fokusirana na Svetog Sina i Njegovo Boæansko delo na zemlji (Dl. 2. 4. koje se sastoji od pouzdanja.

7). N° 9 izbavljajuñu snagu Gospoda.php . Znanje o Bogu utvrœuje veru Naãa spoznaja Istine. 20). stalna pouzdanost u Boæiju prisutnost i voœstvo. iz kojih proishode svi ostali elementi vere i potpunog poverenja. 5. On je. 10. 1 – 3). tako da mu se liånost u potpunosti predaje u poverenju i ljubavi (Gal. 11. dopustivãi mu da se obrati i iskupi (Rim. kroz ceo æivot i u svakom trenutku (Jev.greatbiblestudy. Dnevna vera ukazuje na neophodnost permanentnog verovanja u Boga i Njegovu Silu. dovodi nas do Boga. kroz Logos – Sina. kao i zakljuåci koje moæemo izvesti7: 1. veñ i za ãirenje same crkve kroz evangelizaciju i misiologiju (Jev. ãto je krucijalno. milost i ærtvu nije moguñe razumeti biblijski oblik vere. Vera u Boga utvrœuje pouzdanje Vera je uvek odnos – od Boga. Ta vera je jasna. mi otkrivamo sve ãto je Bog o sebi dozvolio da se spozna. ãto znaåi da je to jedan od osnovnih darova koje Bog daje crkvi na proslavljenje. Iako Boæija suãtina ostaje skrivena.com/biblical_faith. 11). kao izvora Pravde. ne samo za pojedince koji svedoåe o svom daru. otkrio Sebe svetu. 2. kroz Reå. ka ljudskom biñu. Jasno je da biblijska vera sadræi dva elementarna principa: a) veru u Njegovu volju i b) veru u Njegova obeñanja.100 Teoloãki åasopis. 2. Dar vere moæemo razumeti samo kroz teologiju darova Svetog Duha. 10. ali i to biñe odgovara liånom verom svom Tvorcu. 7 Vidi: http://www. 23). Ona obuhvata svakodnevno usmerenje na razvijanje nove hristocentriåne svesti koja nam ukazuje na dnevnu Boæiju prisutnost (II Kor. Prouåavajuñi Sveto pismo. Bez pouzdanja u Njegovu promisao.

Tvorca neba i zemlje i svega vidljivog i nevidljivog. koji je usklaœen sa tipom liånosti. dok kroz odnos sa bliænjima pokazujemo pozitivan stav prema celokupnoj tvorevini.’’ (Snyder. vaæno. i æivot. nije samo oseñanje. ãto znaåi da Duhovne darove. iz åega sledi da svi verujuñi mogu biti nosioci darova (åime ne postaju. sve zna.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 101 3. ali je svuda prisutan. i nada. veñ naåin egzistencije iz svesti novog duha i oåiãñenog srca (I Kor. a koji odgovaraju odreœenim ljudima i njihovim sluæbama’’ (Stott. ali i odgovornoãñu koja svaka sluæba u crkvi sa sobom nosi. 1976: 132). Bog je Biñe bez poåetka i bez kraja. ali i velika misterija pred svakim biñem koje teæi odgonetanju osnovnih istina æivota i smrti: ’’Prava vera je vera u jednoga Boga u Trojici. veñ zbog opãteg dobra. 13). åak.. ãto je. On je Duh koji se ne vidi. Iz svega iznetog uviœamo teãkoñu precizne analize vrsta biblijske vere. episkop Amfilohije. Snajder se nadovezuje: ’’Duhovni darovi su dati ne samo za liåno uæivanje. 1996: 3). Bog je pun ljubavi prema svim ljudima i svima stvorenjima’’ (Episkop Danilo. 1964: 87). Ljubav. naravno. 1974: 20). onda je upravo dar vere jedan od osnovnih aktualizacija Treñeg Lica Trojice u biñu verujuñih. sve moæe. sve vidi. Dar vere Ako pokuãamo da versko odgonetnemo kroz teologiju darova Svetog Duha. i izabrani) i . automatski. Autor koristi termin ’’kapaciteti’’ da bi naglasio pouzdanost i volumen odreœenog dara. o svemu brine. Ta se ljubav uvek odnosi na Boga i Isusa Hrista. Stot daje opãtu definiciju darova Duha: ’’Duhovni darovi su odreœeni kapaciteti dodeljeni po blagodati Boæijoj i kroz Njegovu snagu. ne ni za liåni duhovni razvoj. Flin potvrœuje: ’’Dar bih opisao kao posebnu kvalifikaciju odobrenu od strane [Svetog] Duha svakom verniku za osposobljavanje sluæenja u okviru Tela Hristovog’’ (Flynn. primarno. ona je i poverenje. i ljubav. po Pismu.. Pouzdanje u Boga utvrœuje ljubav Sveto pismo na mnogo mesta ponavlja da vera pokazuje svoj efekat samo ako je bazirana na ljubavi. u celini moæemo nazvati ’’darovima sluæbe’’ ili joã preciznije ’’darovima sluæenja’’ svima kojima je to sluæenje potrebno.

Navedeni aspekt dara Duha uvek je okrenut ka spolja – ka zajednici. naveli bismo samo tri: a) usmerenost. 1934. vizionarski i interventni. kako za pastoralnu. Vizionarski aspekt je intristiåan. koristeñi svaki resurs radi ostvarivanja odreœenog plana. The Gifts of the Spirit. Moæemo zakljuåiti da su darovi Svetog Duha kompleks razliåitih sposobnosti koji sluæe razvoju crkve i svih njenih vernika. joã na poåetku moramo napraviti jasnu distinkciju izmeœu hriãñanske vere. takoœe. Instrumentalni aspekt dara vere odnosi se. Nottingham. Vizionarski aspekt usmeren je na osobe koje imaju moguñnost da sagledaju buduñe potrebe crkve.102 Teoloãki åasopis. Pored mnogih faktora po kojima se Dar prepoznaje. na veru kao instrument sluæenja. Dar vere. . 8 Vidi: Horton. socijalno – eklisijalnom planu. i dara vere. a koje moæemo oznaåiti kao instrumentalni. dok je dar vere specifiåan. okrenut ka unutra – ka pojedincu sa posebnom idejom i doæivljajem i neophodan je. Uzimajuñi reåeno u obzir. Harold. Bez njih. dar vere moæemo razumeti kao natprirodnu sposobnost åiji je izvor u Svetom Duhu i sluæi samoizgradnji verujuñih. Ako bismo svoju paænju okrenuli ka daru vere. a elementi su: Biblija. Assembly of God Publishing House. koji su jednako vaæni. propoved. molitve. rastu i utvrœivanju crkve i evangelizaciji sveta. Dar vere. ali i baziåan dar Svetog Duha koji deluje na opãtem. ka prisutnim vernicima i podrazumeva se u pastoralnoj sluæbi. kao instrumentalizacije Boæije promisli8: hriãñansku ili opãtu veru moæemo razumeti kao izraz Boæije ljubavi i prisutnosti u æivotu ljudi. N° 9 svi mogu doprinositi razvoju crkve. po sebi. tako i za dijakonijsku sluæbu. dar vere ne bi bio prepoznat ni blagosloven. moæemo posmatrati i kroz tri aspekta. Interventni aspekt podrazumeva specifiåan oblik uvida i snage da se preduprede ili suzbiju krize u crkvi. b) pouzdanost i c) izvesnost. Navedeni aspekt se pojavljuje samo u situacijama kada postoji konkretna pretnja po zajednicu i on je neophodan element svih sluæbi u crkvi. prvenstveno. niti bi takav dar bio platforma za razumevanje ostalih darova Svetog Duha. slavljenje i sl.

Tordinci. Chuck Baynard. Kada ta 9 Za viãe informacija vidi Predgovor dr Jasmina Miliña u ’’Belgijsko vjeroispovijedanje’’. Dakle. Commentary of the Belgic Confession of Faith. A Isus Hristos je naãa pravednost. jer bi to znaåilo da je Isus Hrist samo napola Spasitelj. U sluåaju poslednjeg. Osijek i Reformirani teoloãki institut ’’Mihael Starin’’. reñi da Hristos nije dovoljan. i Baynard. moæemo razumeti kao natprirodnu intervenciju u sistemu Boæijeg plana. 3. veñ da je i neãto drugo potrebno za spasenje je najveñe bogohuljenje. Krãñanski centar ’’Dobroga Pastira’’. Chuck. 10 . Zato.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 103 tako. s pravom. Tordinci. ålanu koji nosi naslov ’’Pravednost vere’’ moæemo proåitati10: ’’Verujemo kako na sledeñi naåin spoznajemo ove velike tajne: Sveti Duh nam u srcu pali plamen istinske vere koja prihvata Isusa Hrista sa svim Njegovim zaslugama. Stoga. ne mislimo da je samo vera ta koja nas opravdava. te da ne traæi niãta ãto je izvan Njega. s Pavlom. 2008. Prevedeno i prireœeno prema: ’’Belgijsko vjeroispovijedanje’’. moæemo reñi da smo opravdani samo ’verom’ ili verom ’bez vrãenja Zakona’ (Rim. veñ je ona samo sredstvo kojim prigrljujemo Hrista. onaj koji ima Hrista po veri. Ali. jer nam prepuãta sve zasluge i sva sveta dela koja je uåinio za nas i umesto nas. poãteno govoreñi.9 U svom 22. Pravednost vere u ’’Confessio Belgica’’ (1561. neizostavno sledi – ili u Hristu ne nalazimo sve ãto nam je potrebno za spasenje ili je sve potrebno u Njemu. Krãñanski centar ’’Dobroga Pastira’’. åineñi da naãe srce postaje Njegovo. 2008. 2008. naãu pravednost. 28). u potpunosti je spasen. koja za cilj ima stvaranje spiritualnih potencija za razvoj naroda Boæijeg.) Doktrinarni dokument ’’Belgijsko veroispovedanje’’ predstavlja najstariji i najznaåajniji izraz teoloãke misli Reformisanih crkava Evrope i sveta. Osijek i Reformirani teoloãki institut ’’Mihael Starin’’. a vera je sredstvo koje nas dræi u zajednici s Njim i svim Njegovim dobroåinstvima.

åime soterioloãki put biva osiguran. Vera je pozvanost i povezanost. Moæemo napisati tomove knjiga o biblijskoj veri. ili nije i tu ne moæe biti sredine! Tako. i svaka sumnja u tu istinu iskljuåuje nas iz kruga izabranih. Hristos ili jeste. Ta izvesnost je konkretna. N° 9 dobroåinstva postanu naãa. (Jev. 11. Vera u iskupiteljsku ærtvu na krstu dovoljna je za veåni æivot. Hristos nas je pozvao da ga sledimo i tome ne moæemo niãta dodati. poverenje u ljubav koju gaji Otac prema svojoj deci. æiva realnost koju je moguñe ostvariti i koja se dostiæe u srcu i umu bogotraæitelja. tako da slobodno moæemo govoriti o korenima razumevanja uloge i znaåaja Isusa Hrista upravo kroz dela Æana Kalvina i dokumente reformisanih/prezviterijanskih crkava. Posredstvom Svetog Duha. do potpune predanosti Bogu. naglaãavajuñi hristocentriåno versko usmerenje. pali se æar predanosti åiji je nedvosmislen izraz vera u Mesiju kao Spasitelja ljudi. pravednost i ljubav. niti oduzeti – On je put. pak. ali tako ãto prihvatamo i uranjamo u Hrista.104 Teoloãki åasopis. Zakljuåak Nezahvalno je iznositi zakljuåak na temu biblijske vere. ona su viãe nego dovoljna da nas razreãe naãeg greha. a po volji Svetog Oca. a svoje svedoåanstvo nalazi kroz dobroåinstvo. Istaknimo joã neãto: sve tradicionalne protestantske i evanœeoske crkve prate izneti teoloãki credo.’’ Jasno je da reformisana (kalvinistiåka) teologija svoje korene vidi iskljuåivo u Pismu koje potvrœuje nebesku ulogu Isusa Hrista kao Gospoda. vera je sredstvo koje nas odræava u zajednici sa Gospodom. a moæda. Zato. a vera u Njega putovanje do u izvesnost spasenja. ona zauzima sve mentalne kapacitete i podrazumeva ceo æivot – od svakodnevnih misli i odluka. postajemo opravdani verom. tvrdo åekanje onog åemu se nadamo. ali moæemo se i prepustiti reåima apostola Pavla: ’’Vera je. Dakle. verom.. istrajnost i trpeljivost. ’’ . zatvorimo oåi i zakoraåimo. ali i tek zapoået.. iznad svega. 1). i dokazivanje onog ãto ne vidimo.

Grand Rapids. without which it is not possible to recognize Gods presence in and among people. God. Osijek i Reformirani teoloãki institut ’’Mihael Starin’’. Key words: Religion. Berkhof. Wm. by analyzing the text from the traditional reformed (Calvinist) document ’’Belgian confession’’ author introduces the thesis that Christology of protestant-evangelical type has roots in the theology of Jean Calvin and other reformed thinkers. author is providing possible answers on the following questions: what is religious faith and which are the elements of biblical belief concept? Considering actuality as a form of crisis of religious identity. 2008. Eerdmans Publishing Co. CITIRANA DELA: Baynard. the work brings us the basic premise of the Christian theological concept of Gods existence in the world through terms such as ’’general faith’’ and the ’’gift of faith’’. Hendrikus. Also. theology of gifts. . Commentary of the Belgic Confession of Faith. B. Tordinci. Krãñanski centar ’’Dobroga Pastira’’. Chuck. Christ.. Christian Faith. 2008. Chuck Baynard. Holy Spirit. gift of faith. 1979. Bible. Belgijsko vjeroispovijedanje.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 105 Summary In this paper. belief. which basis is connection between biblical faith and life.

1995. Encyclopedia Britannica Inc. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. 1999. Living Faith. Gloria. Peter. episkop Amfilohije. Lanham. Charles. Bible Doctrine. Paul and Madges. Mystic. A Theological Dictionary. Nema lepãe vere od hriãñanske. Regent College Press. Sremski Karlovci. Grand Rapids. Flynn. Wayne. 2009. N° 9 Buck. 2001. 1974. Brennan. 2007. Charles. Jeff. Christian Faith. Philadelphia. 1999. 19 Gifts of the Spirit. The psychological elements of religious faith. Concise Dictionary of Religion. Hexham. Encyclopedia Britannica. Irving. Thomas. Leslie. Carroll. Charleston. William. Twenty – Third Publications.106 Teoloãki åasopis. Hodgson. Wheaton. Eileen. Biblio Life. Everett. Grudem. Religion and Theology. Faith. Hill. Victor Books. Louisville. . Westminster John Knox Press. Purswell. Vanc couver. Crissy & Markley. Flynn. Episkop Danilo. Knitter. 1996. Srpska pravoslavna Eparhija sremska. 1997. Zondervan. 1851.

Downers Grove. Westminster Press. 1953. Nickoloff. Liturgical Press. 1964. Schaff. 1998. Encyclopedia of Religion and Society. Espin. Philip. Grand Rapids. izdavaå nepoznat. David. Inter – Varsity Press. London. Edwin. Assembly of God Publishing House. Springer. 1976. Lewis. Philadelphia. Kathryn and Marlan. Baptism and Fullness. AltaMira Press. Madden. Leeming. Downers Grove. An Introductory Dictionary of Theology and Religious Studies.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 107 Horton. Encyclopedia of Psychology and Religion. Orlando. James. New York. A Study of Religion. Howard. William. John. Baker Book House. 1934. Collegeville. 1888. Nottingham. . 2007. Swatos. New Schaff – Hercog Encycopledia of Religious Knowledge. Stott. Marlineau. 2009. Lanham. James. Snyder. Inter – Varsity Press. 1954. The Problem of Wine Skins. Harold. The Biblical Faith and Christian Freedom. Stanton. The Gifts of the Spirit.

revelation. Under the Line It was during my studies that I first became acquainted with what is known as ‘the religious scientific critique of God and theology’. God talk. the identity of God. to a certain degree. . In this article the author explores the differences between theology and religious studies by focusing on the theology of God. rather by focusing on a biblical theological understanding of the identity of God. a popular approach to religious studies today. But we see this as no reason to abandon theology as God talk. The confrontation with this critical approach to theology eventually culminated in an intellectual and personal crisis. The crisis is best described in terms of a challenge. biblical theology. theology is not only possible as God talk but also justified. taken for granted.04. rationality. religious studies.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet By Csongor –Szabolcs Bene 109 UDK 211:215 Primljeno: 01.2010 Prihvañeno: 05. The main argument is that theology is in essence God talk and specifically talk about the identity of God in contrast to religious studies where God is talked about in terms of a human projection.04.2010 Originalni nauåni rad Speaking of God Key words: theology. I was faced with the challenge to rethink and to reevaluate the theological assumptions that I had become accustomed to and that I had. philosophy of science. theology of God. God talk when compared to the demands of modern scientific theory it seems that it is impossible.

This ultimately means that all that there is above the line is out of reach. God is posited above the all-dividing line between the physical and the metaphysical. The arrow. the name was written of a key figure. since its analysis is objective. Above these figures. The matchstick figures symbolized the major religions in the world today: Christianity. books were drawn. which indicates the dynamics of the religious experience. On a fundamental level this means that the line cannot be crossed either way. Islam. they all have a holy book. The fourth assumption is that the religious experience is a one-sided affair. a couple of matchstick figures were drawn. God exists as an undefined. The drawing is based on certain assumptions about the reality of the religious experience and the consequent scientific analysis of it. The first assumption is that this image of religions today is the most scientifically responsible. From an objective and uninvolved perspective all religious experiences seem quite similar. from the respective religion. points only in one direction. from bottom up. in philosophical terms the physical and the metaphysical. at the bottom of the board. on a second row. The line on the white board indicated the divide between the natural and the supernatural. an exceptional figure and a God. N° 9 The argumentation in class went like this: on a white-board. The third assumption has to do with what is above the line: God. a line was drawn. as the one who provides access to God. after all. These indicated that all religions have a certain ‘holy book’ that contains their teachings. Above the books. Buddhism and Hinduism. All that there is under the line is what matters. the scientific approach presupposes certain similarities between human religious experiences. unidentified and. closest to the all-dividing line between humanity and God. by consequence unhistorical entity. and humans of all that is physical. Judaism. God was thus part of all that is metaphysical.110 Teoloãki åasopis. under the line. which guarantees scientific objectivity. The second assumption is related to the first: because religion is objectively analyzed. above the line the word God was posited. Above the line. In the scientific community the researcher of religion must take the position of methodical atheism. The one engaged in the study of religions must not be biased by any of the religions under consideration. The ul- .

mute being who is decorated with superlatives. but it is intrinsically bound to the projections of the human mind. theology. This implies the obvious conclusion: God is not an entity on its own but just another faculty of the human imagination. ever-present etc. It is a God with no history. I was familiar with the fact that theologians talk about God as a well-identified entity. no people and no places. The reason is that. can be identified. which is at the heart of the modern criticism of theology as a discipline. everything beyond that line is a projection and in the final analysis non-existent. does not do justice to the Christian theological talk of God. What I am about to challenge in this article is the religious scientific approach to theology specifically its ‘generic conception of God’ in terms of ‘the highest divine being’. This is precisely the underlying principle. So God is well identified through the stories told by his people through the ages. can be called upon and thus. Since human consciousness is bound to all that is under the line. It is no longer a talk about God as such. from a religious-scientific (Religionswissenschaftlich) perspective. In post-Kantian terminology. God is a generic term.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 111 timate assumption is that the Divine is not an entity on its own. God is defined as a distant. which stands for ‘a being up there’. The heart of the problem is that a nonspecific conception of God. taking into account the above criticism. i. all-knowing. God is a projection of the human mind. has a history. but talk of the religious feelings of human beings. as a theologian. in terms of divinity. As a Christian theologian. God is not just a general concept. But ultimately this God has its home in the human consciousness and ability to project a superior higher being. The irony is that this divine being is on the one hand unidentified. I am challenged to consider the possibility of theology as talk about God. and on the other well described by abstract definitions like all-powerful. In the face of this criticism I. God has acted at given times and in certain places to a specific group of people. faceless. but has a Name.e. have been asking the following question: what about the identity of God? From a Christian theological perspective. It is evident that from a Christian theological perspective there are some problems with the above-mentioned critical approach. God is . In history.

Here the identity of God has to do with a biblical theological understanding of who God is and how that understanding helps us to address the problems of a religious-scientific approach to theology in general and to the theology of God. We will present our definition of theology alongside these definitions. which is still popular and much appreciated by theologians. meeting people. What is Theology? Beyond a personal motivation lies also a certain understanding of what the discipline of theology is. (Oxford: Clarendon Press. songs. Anselm. Theology then is a process of rationalization of the believer’s faith experiences.112 Teoloãki åasopis. wisdom sayings and testimonies document Gods history with these people. In order to understand what Christian theology is. These experiences are related to a certain tradition. it is wise to first look at some well-known definitions by representative theologians through the various ages of Christian theology. Charlesworth. as a way of showing our specific take on the matter. N° 9 talked about in terms of appearing. By making explicit what I understand theology to be. consequently the identity of God. Proslogion: with a reply on behalf of the fool by Gaunilo and the author’s reply to Gaunilo. “faith seeking understanding”1 is one of the most well known definitions of theology. . fides quaerens intellectum. Anselm of Canterbury’s classic formulation. translated with an introduction and philosophical commentary by M. It is this theological understanding of God that does not match the modern scientific perspective of the divine. It is a classic definition. According to the anselmian formula. Definitions often carry within them the unspoken presuppositions which lie at the heart of one’s theological work. The consequent stories. will also become more evident. God has an identity. theology is a discipline by which the believers seek to express their beliefs in a reasonable and ordered way. speaking to them and acting in their lives. 1965). laws.J. to a certain 1 St.

2 and also elucidated the content of faith with regard to beliefs that were contrary to the Credo. with a strict demarcation be2 By Credo we mean the theological and confessional achievements of the various Councils of the Church roughly before 400 AD. In the Middle Ages a certain shift took place in the way theology was understood. and by consequence. in their theology. a scientific discipline. With the emergence of scholasticism came also the uprooting of theology as a Church discipline. then what defines its content and aims and what is its relevance to the life of the Church? Thus far. faith. then what is its public relevance? If theology is a matter of public interest. which ought to be taught in an academic setting? If theology is strictly related to the Church. Rationality. D. one could talk about a separate development in modernity. and specifically with the God-human relationship. Most theological works were dealing with the problems related Christology. are all important aspects in one’s definition of what the discipline of theology entails. mainly on talking about God’s being in light of the challenges presented by the critics of the Christian faith. Questions are often raised as one inquires about modern theology: is theology a discipline restricted to the life of the Church or is it a public discipline (meaning apart from the Church). from the Church into the university. 3 See. 680. Theology moved. the character of theology has been mostly shaped by its position within the gap between church and university. Theology was a multifaceted discipline that gave a rational synthesis of the Church’s Credos. Theology during this early period was fully a church discipline that belonged to the community of faith. Theology became more of a system of thought. The early church fathers focused. “Theology. Wright. This break is significant for the way theology is understood today. This faith was hallmarked by the scandalous claim that God had become a human being in the person of Jesus Christ. experience.F.” in NDT.. a subject taught in the academia. .3 In modernity. community and talk.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 113 community and to the individual person. as it were.

H. “Theology: is the systematic reflection on the content of the relationship. How shall we get it across. 1997). The Triune God. The following classic definitions are reminiscent of this very ambiguity. Systematic Theology. R. On the one hand. Christian Theology. 1997).. 32. S. 7 McGrath.E. 2 Ed. (Oxford: Blackwell. An Introduction.. with signs other than linguistic – in the church called “sacrament” and “sacrifice” – or by other behavior of our community. 2000). J. Christelijk Geloof. 5. systematic theology is the reflection on and the ordered articulation of faith. Theology for the Community of God.. pleading it before him and praising him for it. between us and Him. Modern theologians often seek to bridge this gap.”4 “Basically. 6 Jenson. 4 5 e Grenz.”7 Berkhof. while on the other hand. vol. 2002). 1. which God in Jesus Christ has established. that Jesus is risen and what that means?”6 “Theology is reflection upon God whom Christians worship and adore. nd .114 Teoloãki åasopis. in a language. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.. 141. 8 druk (Kampen: Kok. (Oxford: Oxford University Press.W..”5 “…theology is the thinking internal task of speaking the gospel. 1. A. N° 9 tween church theology and academic theology. whether to humankind as message or to God in praise and petition – for of course the church speaks the gospel also to God. they also have to deal with the relevance of academic theology for the life and practice of the Church. The church’s specific enterprise of thought is devoted to the question. theologians try to show the relevance of theology for public matters. The definitions of the modern period are marked by the struggle to precisely define theology as a discipline.

but also about God himself. theology is understood and defined as an intellectual discipline. is critical and systematic reflection of the presupposition of the Church’s ministry of witness. 2002).God and ‘logos’ . and. God kennen – met God leven. Rede uitgesproken bij aanvaarding van het ambt van hoogleraar vanwege de Nederlandse Hervormde Kerk bij de Rijksuniverstieit te Leiden op 18 juni 1982. in the academy or in the public square. i. the content of theology. Theology is ultimately related to the church in an essential way.word of or about God.e. for it finds its roots and ends in her. it is the classic understanding of what the exercise of theological work entails. K. This is not a mere translation of the Greek rendering of theos – logos. by implication. there are some common features that unite them: first. (Nijkerk: Callenbach. 10 The word theology is the convergence the two Greek words ‘theos’. The theologian’s task is to reflect on and to speak about the content of faith. God. 1982). Een pleidooi voor een bevindelijk-pneumatologische fundering van kerk en theologie. theology is broadly defined in modernity as a discipline. theology. Van de Beek. Theology in other words is talk about God. (Grand Rapids/Cambridge: Eerdmans.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 115 “Now the matter. In short. the Church. is God Himself in his dealings with the world and the ensuing good message of His works.10 rather.”9 Beyond the ambiguity of these definitions. But the context in which theological reflection and speaking happens may vary.”8 “…Theology is about the knowledge of God. A. Protestant Theology in the Nineteenth Century. New Edition. However it is not only about the human ideas about God or the human religious feelings of human beings. 2.. It may be in the church. the content of faith. related in its aims and tasks to the theologian who reflects on the content of his faith. Second. Third. theology happens in relationship with a faith community.e.. The ancient Greek philosophers used this . To talk about God does 8 9 Barth. i. The basic premise of our definition is that the task of theology is to talk about God. in community with others.

To formulate this in a question: who is this God. but the contrary is true. theology is also talk about the world and humanity. It is right. i. Therefore the understanding that theology is talk about God is central and directive here. and can also be addressed. but also to the broader meaning of what talk means. Later. in Christian thinking. the most fundamental question the theologian had to answer was an epistemological question.e. To talk about God and the identity of God is to talk about the God who is identified in and through the Biblical narratives. Theology is an articulated exteriorization of the theologian’s experiences related to God. In the standard post-enlightenment theologies. it became related specifically to the sum of the teachings about God in the Christian tradition. because in a certain sense. To talk about God is to talk about the identity of God. . To talk about the identity of God is to talk about a God who is identified by specific events in time and space. but also a communal act that takes place in the context of a certain faith community. The above definition of theology might be considered a narrow representation of what the task of theology might entail in its totality. the Church through the ages.e.116 Teoloãki åasopis. This critical note implies that theology is more than just talk about God. God is not a general term for some abstract ‘high being’. a discourse in verbal and nonverbal forms. namely talk about God. This can be traced to the all-defining question of the Enlightenment: how do you know what you know? Most modern theologians struggled to definition for all teachings about metaphysics. The identity of God also implies that God is identified by a Name. This is not only an individualistic endeavor. i. N° 9 not only refer to the act of utterance itself. our question about the identity of God is a departure from the kind of theological prolegomena developed during the eighteenth and nineteenth century. The identity of God implies the actual presence of God in history. Here we focus on this one aspect of theology. about whom we as theologians talk? Initially the answer to the question might seem obvious. On a fundamental level. It implies a certain way of talking about God.

Thus Adriaanse’s 11 He has been the professor of Philosophy of Religion. from 1979 until his retirement in 2001. Epistemological Criticism of Theology At the tail-end of the twentieth century the general feel in the field of theology was that the talk of God was not only problematic but also impossible.11 His over-all work is an outstanding exposition concerning the problems of twentieth century theology. Adriaanse. to replace the epistemological question how do you know? with the question who is God? Is it fundamentally possible to ask a different question and receive a different answer? In actuality this is a turn from an epistemological towards a theological foundation and understanding of theology. To ask the question who is God? is to ask about the identity of God. What essentially happened was that the epistemological question became the fundamental question for theology. Part of understanding the problem of modern theology is to define as clearly as possible what the problem actually is. Ethics and Encyclopedia of Theology at the University of Leiden. . Theology in the post-enlightenment era was no longer about God as such but much more about whether or not it is possible for humans to understand anything about God.J. in theology. The question we want to ask here is this: is it possible. In a way this is a different starting point than that of the classic post-Enlightenment prolegomena marked by epistemology. Our critical observation considering this shift is this: the kind of question one asks influences the kind of answer one receives. we have identified the work of the Dutch theologian H.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 117 justify their theologies concerning this very question. To avoid the risk of entering into a meta discussion of the subject.

1963). In it we will be able to formally analyze Adriaanse’s conception of experience. After the historical considerations we will look at some of the formal aspects of the established order of knowing. Popper. We will approach Adriaanse’s argument from three different perspectives: historical. He is frequently compared with Kant. Modern: in the sense that it deals with the core of Enlightenment ideology. Karl Popper’s Conjectures and Refutations 13 is an excellent introduction to the history of the philosophy of science.118 Teoloãki åasopis. The order of knowledge is subject to historical processes. 13 K. From a systematic perspective we will see Adriaanse’s definition of what constitutes a valid theory of knowledge in its relationship to modern scientific method. and is seen by some as the bearer in . knowledge and rationality. formal and systematic. (London: Routledge. rather we use it to refer to the theological era which spans from the beginning of the eighteenth century up to the end of the twentieth century. The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. Conjectures and Refutations. Therefore it is important to shortly trace these developments. Conjectures is the guide by which 12 For clarity’ sake. the word modern in this context is not used in the sense of contemporary or today.12 The Established Order of Knowing One of Adriaanse’s main arguments is that there is a certain order by which it can be established how and what one knows. The historical overview provides us with a broader perspective on the issues Adriaanse raises and also clearly defines his position in the field. See O’Hear’s assessment of Poppers importance in the field of the philosophy of science: “Large claims are made for Popper by his admirers. The work of Adriaanse is intrinsically connected to the developments of the philosophy of science in general. N° 9 work provides the vocabulary and the conceptual framework for our analysis of modern theology. What today is accepted as valid knowledge can be traced in the history of philosophy of science.R.

” A.” “Popper’s philosophy of science involves putting falsification center stage. In it we find a certain correlation between. Adriaanse often notes that changes in scientific theory have had great influence on theology. Not only what constitutes knowledge has gone through changes. (London: Routledge. As falsifying our theories is the one thing we can do effectively in science. Popper’s treatment of Kant offers us keen insights into the shape of the scientific theory during the eighteenth century. what was considered science. After that he continues with the eighteenth century Enlightenment and the impact Kant had on the philosophy of science. O’Hear (ed. that is.1. . Modern theology is mainly characterized by the influence of Enlightenment rationality. If they do not. and devise a new theory to account for the data – and it is worth underlining here that Popper sees the forming of theories as a matter of imaginative conjecture. vol. Popper presents the fifteenth and sixteenth century tendencies through the juxtaposition of two representative philosophers: Bacon and Descartes. Critical Assessments of Leading Philosophers. and its ensuing age of rationalism. he is a believer in reason and in the power of reason to solve our problems. we should abandon them. Kant’s Critique. as a discipline. in Conjectures.) Karl Popper. meaning: how do we know what we know? has gone through a series of changes. Both the content and the method of knowledge are of interest here. and the shape of theology in the twentieth century. and see if they survive. “Popper’s philosophy of science is marked by a deep hostility to any profession of certainty or attempt to claim justification for one’s theories. 2004).Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 119 we trace the main tendencies of two major periods in the philosophy of science.” His main contribution has been to the philosophy of science. on the whole and that theology has struggled to define itself in accorthe twentieth century of the Kanitan torch. and abandoning any futile at verification or justification. that is what we should do: test our theories empirically against the predications which follow from them. but also the method of acquiring knowledge.14 Throughout history. 14 Popper. 3-6. the Middle Ages and the Enlightenment. traces the history and development of the theory of science from an epistemological perspective.

This very thought contributed to the birth of modern science. Conjectures and Refutations. “Descartes based his optimistic epistemology on the important theory of the veritas Dei. Thus the truthfulness of God must make truth mani- 15 16 Popper. Popper. in other words it may reveal itself.15 At the heart of this optimism is the presupposition that truth is manifest. Nature is an open book. 7. What we clearly and distinctly see to be true must indeed be true. True method is none other than the true reading or interpretation of Nature that leads to true knowledge. Popper leads us to the fundamental understanding of modern theories of science. The first stream of thought is classical empiricism (Bacon). by the most optimistic view of man’s power to discern truth and to acquire knowledge”. episteme.120 Teoloãki åasopis. Only if his mind is poisoned by prejudice can he fall into error”. Conjectures and Refutations. or superstition. is the anticipation of the mind. in which the ultimate source of knowledge is observation. False method. on the other hand. the truthfulness of Nature.16 Bacon further distinguishes between true and false Method. or conjecture or hypothesis. By following and contrasting these two. . The Reformation and Renaissance in the fifteenth and sixteenth century brought about a certain “epistemological optimism. Popper follows two streams in the development of the English and the European theories of knowledge and science. 5. He who reads it with a pure mind cannot misread it. N° 9 dance with the ever-developing findings of science. or prejudice. if not it may be uncovered by human beings. Bacon’s doctrine “might be described as the doctrine of the veritas Naturae. The second stream is classical rationalism (Descartes). which leads to doxa. in which the ultimate source of knowledge is the intellectual intuition of clear and distinct ideas. Adriaanse’s work is part of this wider framework and his critique of classic theology is embedded in this kind of rationalism. for otherwise God would be deceiving us.

Most historians of philosophy agree that humanity has gone from the ‘darkness’ of the Middle Ages to the ‘light’ of the Enlightenment and Modernity. 15. Conjectures and Refutations. all humans have the source of knowledge in them.20 At stake here is the freedom of man to think.17 Both Bacon and Descartes agree that there is no need to appeal to a higher authority. Conjectures and Refutations. as divine authorities. in order to arrive at the unshakable basis of self-evident truth”. Conjectures and Refutations. 17 18 19 20 Popper. we ourselves. Conjectures and Refutations. and they set them up within each individual man. which seemed to function. the part which is the source of our fallible opinions (doxa). such as the senses or the intellect. 7. 15.17. Popper critically concludes: “We can see more clearly why this epistemology.e. “Bacon and Descartes set up observation and reason as new authorities. in Popper’s opinion. and which has an almost divine authority over us”. of our errors and of our ignorance. anti-authoritarianism. However. the senses and the intellect were the authorities. but it seems like the efforts of both Bacon and Descartes are an attack on prejudice and naiveté. But in doing so they split man into two parts…. 19 New authorities have been erected: instead of Aristotle and the Bible.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 121 fest”. Popper. Popper elsewhere points out that this is none other than Kant’s principle of autonomy. Thus we are split into a human part. Popper’s critical analysis shows that “Descartes’ method of systematic doubt is also fundamentally the same (as that of Bacon): it is a method of destroying all false prejudices of the mind. not only in Descartes but also in Bacon’s form. the part which is the source of real knowledge (episteme). .18 It may be somewhat strong to suggest. Popper raises the critical question of whether they truly managed to rid themselves of their dependency on authority for their optimistic epistemologies. and a super-human part. Popper. remains essentially a religious doctrine in which the source of knowledge is divine authority”. i. Popper.

the Critique of Pure Reason. Popper places the significance of Kant’s oeuvre alongside the American and French revolutions. Sapere aude! Dare to use your own intelligence. If it is a knowl21 22 Popper. Popper. is the one who systematized the achievements of classical empiricism by declaring the independence of ‘pure reason’ in his major work. the last couple of centuries. . has had a major influence on contemporary theology. This is the battle-cry of the Enlightenment. as the most prolific figure of this period. Conjectures and Refutations. Kant. The first step is the clear definition of the limits of knowledge. Such a state of tutelage I call ‘self-imposed’ if it is due. Kant made the next step. Conjectures and Refutations. Nature or God. a step towards the liberation of the human intellect from any outside agency. The kind of rationalism that has been defining the European mind-set. Where Bacon and Descartes were cautious. but to lack of courage or determination to use one’s own intelligence without the help of a leader. It is thinking without being conditioned by outside authorities. 178.”22 Kant’s definition clearly summarizes the basic program of the Enlightenment: the freedom of the individual human beings to think and to define reality for themselves. Kant’s work provided the intellectual backbone for the new era on the European continent. 175. The contribution of this ‘rebellion’ was and still is the affirmation of the autonomous human being as the ultimate and true agent of knowledge. not to lack of intelligence. Popper’s analysis of Kant starts with a quote from Kant on the definition of Enlightenment: “[it is] the emancipation of man from a state of self-imposed tutelage… of the incapacity to use his own intelligence without external guidance. Popper outlines two basic steps in the work of Kant. A step beyond classical empiricism and rationalism is Popper’s treatment of the Enlightenment. N° 9 We understand this as humanity’s struggle for independent thinking.21 The student of theology who wants to understand the shape of modern theology has to take into consideration the impact Kant’s thinking has had.122 Teoloãki åasopis.

He asserted that “our ideas of space and time are inapplicable to the universe as a whole”23. because they precede Kant’s critique of religion. but only in the human intellect. we see even more clearly the relevance of the above overview. as he had humanized science. Popper also notes that “in Kant’s own striking formulation of this view ‘our intellect does not draw its laws from nature. The theory of the free thinking human being crystallizes most evidently in Kant’s ethics.25 Within the parameters of the Kantian understanding of Ethics. Popper explains “Kant wrote his Critique in order to establish that the limits of sense experience are the limits of all sound reasoning about the world”. but an inductive knowledge. Popper.the doctrine that we cannot accept the command of an authority. …The doctrine of autonomy . this means that there is no outside authority. Since the Middle Age there has been a gradual move towards the in23 24 25 Popper. It is not a deductive knowledge anymore. Conjectures and Refutations. Kant turns the whole Cartesian understanding of the method of knowledge on its head. The limits of the human intellect are determined by time and space. be applied to ordinary physical things and events. They can. is the humanization of knowledge. there is no certain knowledge only speculation. 181. but that the human being himself is the one who is the judge of the truth of an ethical demand. projection. 179. however exalted. Conjectures and Refutations. as the ultimate basis of ethics”. Since knowledge is not found ‘out there’. i. Conjectures and Refutations. Human knowledge thus cannot reach beyond what is given in the world.e. In Kant’s critique of religion. Popper.24 In other words.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 123 edge freed from ‘authorities’. but imposes its laws upon nature’”. Popper’s survey of Kant and the two steps are important. however. then the critical question is how far can that kind of knowledge or intellect reach? To answer the question one must look into Kant’s relevant ideas on time and space. Popper observes the following. the human being becomes a free agent. 180. Beyond that. “Kant humanized ethics. Kant’s second step. in Popper’s analysis. .

and to worship Him”. In our view. who does not accept any ‘higher’ authority anymore. you must not condemn me for saying: every man created his God. Knowledge and Rationality The nineteenth and twentieth century theology is dominated by Descartes’s epistemological dictum ego cogito ergo sum. The Enlightenment is the main paradigm which to a large extent defines contemporary scientific rationality. and even… if He should reveal Himself to you. It is formulated more often as a question: how do you know what you know? In other words the certainty of knowledge had to be established in a rational way. For in whatever way the Deity should be made known to you. From the moral point of view… you even have to create your God. We turn our attention now to Adriaanse’s conception of experience. Conjectures and Refutations. Popper highlights the following words from Kant: “much as my words may startle you. but projects his or her own God. Experience. these are the key loci that hold Adriaanse’s argument together. Adriaanse’s critique of classic theology in rooted in this rationality. Kant provides the systematic basis on which this epistemological rationality rests. in order to worship him as your creator.26 The freed human being has reached his/her own maturity by becoming the subject of his or her own history.124 Teoloãki åasopis. They are foundational to his critique of classic theology and his theory of religious education. knowledge and rationality. This self-actualization is one of the main factors which determine the context of twentieth century theology. it is you… who must judge whether you are permitted [by your conscience] to believe in Him. . The free human being. is at the heart of modern theology. 26 Popper. 182. N° 9 dependence of human consciousness and reason. Through Popper’s review of the main tendencies in the philosophy of science we come to clearly understand the ideological context in which Adriaanse poses his critique of classic theology.

for Adriaanse. “Offenbarung. Theologie en Rationaliteit: Godsdienstwijsgerige bijdragen.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 125 We have already noted that theology did not develop in a vacuum. 4 . of a certain Gehalt (C) (content). we will trace in Adriaanse’s work what he sees as the dominant factors on the field of experience.. In the problematisation of revelation. In what follows. the recipient (D) gains an insight (E). but struggled to adapt itself to the demands of science. The predominant discussions in theology related to revelation are focused on the possibilities (or impossibilities) of what may 27 Adriaanse. II Religionphilosophisch” (RGG /VI) 464-467. who reveals himself in situation (B) in its Gehalt (C) (content) for the recipient (D) with the effect (E). Rationality. is not only about the “how”. It is the place where theologians have to come to terms with the presuppositions of their theology in relation to the demands of the scientific theory. (Kampen: Kok. Theologically speaking we are dealing with Adriaanse’s theory of revelation. But before we engage with Adriaanse’s problematisation of revelation. Revelation as a theological locus is foundational for all systematic theologies. specifically to the various theories of knowledge.27 The usual theological locus where the issues related to experience. in the revelatory situation (B). From the perspective of: the author (A). knowledge and rationality. it becomes clear how Adriaanse thinks about the issues related to theological method and theological rationality. we want to present a common understanding of revelation in its formal and theological definitions. knowledge and rationality are discussed is the prolegomena of a theological work. 28 Schwöbel.. C. from the author of revelation (A). 1988) 7.28 The formal structure of revelation may be approached from on the one hand from the perspective of the author and on the other from the perspective of the recipient of revelation.J. H. From the perspective of the receiver: in the act of revelation. He takes one step further and explores the possibilities and the validity of knowledge. or the methodology of knowledge.

and enables its execution (E). reveals Himself. makes the truth of the message certain. manifests His character as Truthful Love (C). His creatures. if there is any. N° 9 or may not happen between the author and the recipient of the revelation. Theologically revelation implies the disclosure of God to humans. the almighty Creator (A). It is apparent from this definition that God is the author (A) of the revelatory act. between reason and ‘otherworldly’ or ‘received’ knowledge? It is often assumed that the kind of knowledge that revelation provides and the nature of human reason are mutually exclusive. His will and His character. yes there is correlation between God and humans in the act of revelation. this is the main challenge: can there be any genuine correlation between humans and God? The answer to this challenging question is twofold. then what is the . and at the same time. In the Middle Age. Firstly. In theological terms. through which he gives certainty about the truth to those who listen to this message (D). There was an obvious correlation between human intellect and divinely revealed knowledge.126 Teoloãki åasopis. Secondly. However. (in Christ-atoned). this is how the formal structure translates: Israel’s God. is the content of revelation (C). and through which he enables life in faith as life in the certainty of truth (E). The recipient of the revelation (D) understands his life situation (B) as brought to light by this act of revelation. At stake here is the following critical question: what happens between the sender and the receiver in the act of revelation? What does the receiver ‘get’ or what does he come to know from or about the sender? Or to ask the same question differently: what is the difference. when revelation is seen as an act of self disclosure of God. in the apostle’s life situation marked by the apparent failure of the mission of Jesus (B). however through the raising of the Crucified One his will for communion with. The dawn of the Enlightenment went beyond this and brought this traditional relationship of revelation and reason into a problematic relationship. In a nutshell. since the Reformation the focus has shifted mainly towards reason as the place of revelation. Thus God is not the projection of the human mind but the subject of revelation. the presuppositions were more optimistic about the relationship between revelation and reason.

Both theologians answered these questions in their own way. So talk of the ‘beyond’ does not have the character of time and space.29 thus identifying the human intellect and emotion as place where the revelation of God landed.]. One of the most significant examples of these issues is the discussions about the theologies of Schleiermacher and Barth.. 2003). These theological and philosophical considerations are at the basis of Adriaanse’s rejection of the classic understanding of revelation. (Berlin: De Gruyter. There was no distinct subject and object relationship.D.30 Barth in a certain sense refused to locate the act of revelation in the human.[reprint of the 1831 ed. He rather focused on the true subject of revelation. Die Kirchliche Dogmatik. By consequence the line blurred between God and humans. F. Der christliche Glaube nach den Grundsätzen der evangelischen Kirche im Zusammenhange dargestellt. but only the thinking and feeling of human beings. (Zürich: EVZ-Verlag. vol I. K..Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 127 human faculty that receives this act? In other words: when God reveals himself where does revelation land in the human consciousness? These critical questions shed light on the problems of human rationality and the knowledge of God. Furthermore this means that the possibility of conceiving God as an entity on its own is impossible. Barth on the other hand sought to reaffirm the otherness of God and thus distinguished the subjectivity of human consciousness from the objectivity of God. . 30 Barth. ‘God’ is a product of human consciousness and it is ultimately bound to it. His assumption is that there is no correlation between God and human beings.E. Finite humans are confined to time and space (classic Kantianism) and therefore they cannot reach beyond what is given in time and space. and therefore 29 Schleiermacher. God. Schleiermacher sought to define revelation in terms of the human consciousness as “the feeling of absolute dependence”. 1932-1938). As the recipient of revelation humans are unable to think of or know God. Barth’s conclusion was then that without revelation there is no correlation possible whatsoever between God and humans.

This is precisely the core of Adriaanse’s argument for the impossibility of the rationality of classic theology. So what is a scientific theory? Adriaanse uses the following definition to identify a scientific theory: it is a sys31 Trans. or even talk about what has happened and what has been experienced? The problem of rational justification is the main point of criticism Adriaanse poses to theology. A Theory of Scientific Method Now we have arrived at the point where we can look in more detail at Adriaanse’s systematic formulation of the theory of scientific knowledge. The question which Adriaanse seems to be positing is this: regardless of whether revelation is possible or not. according to which he proposes that all theological work and talk of God ought to be measured by. Here we have to make an important remark: he often defines science as an openbare31 discipline. The heart of the problem is not so much the initial experience of God. . but the more significant issue of the talk about God or the act of rationalization and coherent speaking about what one has experienced and what has been revealed. reception of the revelation. So far our study has introduced the rationale of Adriaanse’s arguments. we have to see how Adriaanse defines a scientific theory. N° 9 one cannot rationally justify God talk.128 Teoloãki åasopis. First. public. as widely accessible as possible. because it ought to be present on the public square. It is not a private matter. This will help us to understand Adriaanse’s objections against classic theology. We have to examine at this point the two aspects of the scientific method Adriaanse proposes.e. i. We will continue with the systematic formulation of Adriaanse’s theory of knowledge and scientific method. can one still rationally justify. meaning that science in its entirety is an open matter and accessible for everyone who engages in it.

scientific theories must be verifiable. in other words. This point strongly connects to point ‘c’. taste. they have to demark the specific area which they are about to address. scientific theories cannot be about the whole of reality. they must be a well defined part of it. H. rather..A. What are the right steps towards developing a scientific theory? Or what are the right conditions that make scientific theories possible? Adriaanse lists five conditions that determine how a scientific theory must work: a) Precision – It has to be clearly stated which part of reality one is attempting to describe.32 It is a rational system of thought and definitions. and particularly not contradictory statements. there is also the how of scientific theories. touch.. Het verschijnsel theologie.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 129 tem of thoughts and definitions. (Amsterdam/Meppel: Boom. Scientific theories cannot refer to reality as a whole.. Since theories are claims about reality. only with a part of it. as accurate as possible. L. measure and so on. These definitions have to refer to a concrete part of reality. . Second. H. d) Accuracy – The hypotheses which come from a certain theory must be confirmed by facts. Over de wetenschapelijke status van de theologie. 32 Adriaanse. 1987) 54-56. Leertouwer. Finally. c) Empirical adequacy – There must be sensory experiences which can be correlated with a specific theory. b) Consistency – there should not be any contradiction within the whole of the argument. one should be able to see. Science is not supposed to concern itself with the totality of all there is. logical consistency is required in the formulation of a coherent theory. and preferably non-contradictory in nature.J. Krop. about a concrete part of reality that is formulated in such a way that it is possible to deduce examinable theories from it.

what are those possibilities? The Impossibility of Theology Earlier we have presented our definition of theology. We have argued that in its strictest sense theology is talk about God and specifically talk about the identity of God. These methodological considerations bring us to our next point. goes further in search of a so called scientific theology. Het verschijnsel theologie. Adriaanse. in the field of humanities and in studies such as history. 33 In other definitions of scientific theories. However. according to classic theology God makes Himself known. one assumes that he or she may know the past). N° 9 e) General acceptance of presuppositions – every scientific theory works with a certain accepted presupposition (as in historical studies. The reason is that. . having established what science and adequate scientific theories are. be said about God? In other words: what can be scientifically asserted about God? His answer is that there is nothing to be said about God in a scientific way. Adriaanse asks: Is theology possible in the present context of the scientific demands in a university? And if so. This search is in actuality about the possibility of theology in an age of science. one might come across one more point. 54-56. Repeatability is much more relevant for the natural sciences. Or in theological terms: God cannot be 33 Adriaanse. repeatability is not possible. To formulate this in a question. Adriaanse criticizes precisely this understanding by posing the critical question: what can publicly. which Adriaanse omits from his own system and that is repeatability.130 Teoloãki åasopis. Therefore Adriaanse is not concerned with this aspect of the scientific theory. the task of the historian is to recover with as much accuracy as possible what has happened. in the sense which is universally valid. When events happen only once. A scientific phenomenon ought to be repeatable at all times with the same exact results. By examining Adriaanse’s criticism of theology we submit our definition to be tested.

We want to understand the arguments Adriaanse presents and the way he applies the above definition and conditions of scientific theory to classic theology. . H.v. Flesseman-van Leer. God is the object of theology.O. rijksuniversiteit.35 Another critical point Adriaanse makes is that because classic theology is talk about God. Bruggen en bruggehoofden : een keuze uit de artikelen en voordrachten van prof.36 This very objectification of God is impossible. Here Berkhof talks in more detail about. The next step is to put classic theology against these conditions. These are two critical reasons why Adriaanse considers classic theology as being not scientific. H.g.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 131 known unless He revels Himself. F. 1981).15. is not in any way public and therefore the irreconcilable difference remains between the practice of public science and the talk of God. E. en uitgeg. rijksuniversiteit. red. Verdonk. 36 Het Het specifiek specifiek theologische theologische aan aan een een Berkhof. Berkhof uit de jaren 1960-1981 / verz. (Nijkerk: Callenbach. We already have seen the five conditions necessary to establish a theory as scientific. according to Adriaanse.. dr. t. van Gennep en W. The main question here is: how does classical theology measure up to the demands of modern scientific theories? The answer is: 34 Adriaanse. E. how God is the object (voorwerp) of the study of theology.34 Revelation. 35 Adriaanse. 9. Classic Theology and the Demands of the Modern Scientific Method Adriaanse analyses theology by measuring its scientific merit. zijn afscheid als kerkelijk hoogleraar te Leiden .

namely consistency.e. 57-63.132 Teoloãki åasopis. 3) Empirical adequacy – is clearly impossible for the statements about God. Het verschijnsel theologie. however. the condition for accuracy is also impossible. considering issues related to theodicy (e. 2) Consistency – essentially consistency is possible in classical theological theories.38 The conclusion of the above considerations is that theology only on one point. Where does this leave classic theology? What 37 Science deals with all that is in the world and not with the world itself. The critical question is often asked here of how can one talk about something one has not seen? 4) Accuracy – based on the above empirical in-adequacy. then why is there evil? Good vs. in today’s understanding of science all theories are developed from the vantage point. Therefore Adriaanse’s argument establishes the following: classic theology does not correspond to the demands of a scientific theory therefore is not considered to be a scientific discipline. it ought to focus on a specific point of reality. is able to measure up to the standards of modern science. Theology cannot pretend to deal with reality as a whole. if God created the world good. evil is hard to explain consistently). They are theoretical in character thus miss empirical adequacy.g. or presupposition of atheism. This is the reason why theology has to be classified as a pseudo-science. in reality it is much harder. . However. God and the world as creation37) it does not correspond to the condition of scientific precision. 38 Adriaanse. N° 9 1) Precision – because classical theology deals with the totality of reality (i. which is needed. 5) General acceptance of presuppositions – the presupposition which all classical theologies share is that there is a God.

in order to be able to maintain any standing. Historically. We think here of the early church fathers who did theology in the context of various competing philosophies and theologies. one can trace the development of theology through the ages and come to the conclusion that it is a living discipline. He suggests that the theologian cannot talk about God. From the vantage point of the scientific method and philosophy of science theology as a discipline faces one the most critical challenges of our time. rather. This is ultimately what it means the loss talk of God in theology. In modern times. The Complete Loss of the “Talk of God” The implication of the above argumentation is that scientifically there is nothing to be said about God. It has always sought to define itself on its own and in the context in which it was practiced. Second. Adriaanse through his critique addresses this very challenge. is in a situation of crisis. Here we understand the word ‘God’ to mean an entity in itself who can be experienced in his revelation in time and space. redefinition and affirmation of theology we call a living discipline. because by its method and content it only provides pseudo-knowledge. It is a challenge that goes right to the heart of what theology is. he qualifies its object. presented by the scientific developments. The question is: what is the way forward. it loses its position as one of the sciences in the universities. Theology thus. probably the most important point for our work: talk of God in a university setting is deemed impossible. as understood in the classical sense. This is what it comes down to eventually: the complete loss of the talk of God. The partial conclusion is this: classical theology when measured by the standards of science is no science. theologians are faced with the same kind of challenges. And third.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 133 are the consequences? First.’ Here ‘God’ means a conceptual entity of the human . but only about ‘God. adaptation. if there is nothing to be said about God as such? Adriaanse is not about to discard theology. God. which in turn has an effect on its methodology and content. it has to fall under general religious studies. We also have in mind the reformers who in the context of the church developed and reformed theology. This constant growth.

. 63. This turn. Therefore the object of research is the religious human subject. closely related to religious science. The theologian has to talk about ‘God’ only in terms of what human beings think about ‘God. Since 1876.134 Teoloãki åasopis. Het verschijnsel theologie. Here classic subjects such as exegesis come under the department of arts. Christianity. As one might expect classic theology is only taught in faculties which are affiliated with a specific church and denomination.’ Therefore. during this century. has moved from its dominant and privileged position into being considered. Religious studies and science is a fairly recent development in the field of sociology and cultural anthropology. the public universities function as duplex ordo. church history under the general department of history.’ Thus. religious science has found its home in cultural studies. This often causes uneasiness for theologians trying to find their way in this new constellation of sciences. It is a shift from theology to anthropology. where religion is researched as a cultural phenomenon. which means that there is a separation between public universities and church theology. one religion among other religions. scientifically. one can only ask about religion. This kind of organization has led to the decentralization of theology and to the compartmentalization of the various theological disciplines. Religious philosophy. to the subject. The general tension between religious science and theology remains. After Schleiermacher and Feuerbach religion is understood to be the deepest longing of human beings. all that remains is talk of human religiosity. Since the Enlightenment. N° 9 mind. the ultimate object of theology is not God but the human beings who talk about ‘God. This is a significant move.’39 When ‘talk of God’ is lost. Religious philosophy is 39 Adriaanse. also finds its roots in this age. practical and pastoral theory under psychology and-so-forth. In the public faculties religious science is increasingly taught of as part of the greater humanities. has had a political and administrative influence on the organization of the public universities and their faculties in the Netherlands. meaning the human attitude towards ‘God.

rather. seen or talked about as an entity of its own reality. it presents and explains religion as a universal human possibility. The quotation marks have a very specific purpose in defining the division. Religion understood as an expression of a whole range of human projections on ‘God’. is no longer on the Theos but on the human being. 63. By consequence it is religious anthropology. Adriaanse. as is the case with dogmatics. The focus. i. Het verschijnsel theologie. Theology in this sense is about religion. Only a human definition of ‘God’ is valid matter to study for the theologian or the scientist of religion. a divinity. 89-96.e.41 Adriaanse then concludes that the scientific character of religious science can be maintained as long as there is a clear demarcation from classic theology. In philosophical terms.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 135 not about showing the truth of one religion against the other. This in turn begs the question: How does one talk about God in a publicly responsible way? The short answer to this question according to Adriaanse is religious science. . Conclusion The working thesis of our study is that theology fundamentally is talk about God and more specifically talk about the identity of 40 41 42 Adriaanse. Het verschijnsel theologie.73. This might seem speculative in nature but it is a real differentiation. Adriaanse. meaning a ‘God’ as talked about by people. Adriaanse further develops the following differentiation to show the essential divergence between religious science and theology: Theology must be about ‘God’.40 We previously have seen what the loss of the ‘talk of God’ entails as meant by Adriaanse. in theology. God. this move is a move from metaphysics to religious and cultural anthropology. Only the human word about ‘God’ is the object of research and science. Het verschijnsel theologie.42 This demarcation has to be maintained as strictly as possible. is impossible.

but we talk about God who is present in His acting in the history of His people. is a metaphysical matter and thus not open for public inquiry. we can say that we understand that there might be difficulties considering the scientific developments of the last century. Adriaanse’s work was the guideline for discussing the matters related to the test. Adriaanse in his criticism of classic theology focuses on the wrong God. Adriaanse has a concept of God. Therefore Adriaanse calls for the abandonment of theology and proposes ‘religious studies’ as a more ‘scientific’ alternative. One can only talk about ‘God’ as a concept. The reason is that God. is a non-academic discipline. what we were dealing with is the understanding of the word ‘God’. which is intrinsically related to human religious consciousness and the human ability to project a higher being. Our main argument against Adriaanse is that we do not talk about God as the one who is above the line unrelated to His presence. We have submitted our thesis to the test in light of the religious scientific critique of theology. we point toward a dynamic understanding of the word ‘God’.J. H. By using the term ‘identity’. We formulated Adriaanse’s challenge in the following question: does theology deserve the adjective ‘academic’? Is there a kind of God talk that is justified or at least plausible for such an academic discourse? Considering the main narrative texts of our theological tradition (the basic texts in the Bible) and the long and rich history of God talk. It was meant to compare theology to the scientific demands for an academic discipline.136 Teoloãki åasopis. theology defined as talk about God. His conclusion is: theology considered from a scientific perspective. N° 9 God. as such. is impossible. Exactly those developments are problematic when it comes to theology and specifically to God talk. He argues that. there is no reason why theology ought not to be an academic discipline. Modern scientific theory works with a definition of God as a metaphysical transcendent being. Then it considers this God inaccessible and impossible to talk about Him. which is other than the paradigm of God talk in Israel and the Church. Essentially. which is . To answer Adriaanse’s challenge. considering the scientific developments of the last two centuries. The identity of God substantiates what we understand by the word ‘God’.

but the God who is identified in the history of His people. The word ‘God’. for Adriaanse. and relates to them so much that there is talk of a marriage between God and His people. i. in their history. He is not to be manipulated nor used for their purposes. there He is as well. Time and time again we hear the motto: YHWH is God and not the idols. This is precisely the problem. The biblical narratives identify God as a person who gives His Name and where His Name is called upon. YHWH. namely to show that the identity of God is decisive for their respective theologies. The way we talk about God is neither the theoretical ‘God’ of philosophy nor a God who is only proclaimed in the Word. The Name. It is by grace that He enters . i. He appears to people. theologically speaking. the biblical narratives about YHWH.e. We understand that theology pertains to this God. Through those narratives God exists as a separate entity who talks. He understands classic theology as being about a constructed ‘God’. address. therefore He does not fit any philosophical system or rationality that tries to domesticate Him according to its own rules. His people’s history is His history as well. The Shema. They have to live with the knowledge that their God is God. That is the reason why he opts for understanding the word ‘God’ as a human projection.e. qualifies the meaning of the word ‘God’. where God is defined as a high being which exists outside the reality we experience as human beings. The way we understand the word ‘God’ is the way biblical narratives identify God. which means that He is free to be and act according to His own will. acts and moves. He does so not outside the perceived reality but in the reality of their lives.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 137 fundamentally defined by the Name of God. is a reminder of this very truth. When we talk about God we talk about YHWH. talks to them. God has an identity and is not merely a definition. one of the most basic and important confession of Israel. judging people and restoring them. He does things like saving people. It is not a constructed understanding of the word. Theologians through the ages have struggled with this very issue. ultimately emanates from the religious imagination of humans. Adriaanse’s criticism of theology pertains exactly to this ‘God’. YHWH does not conform to the ideals of His people. He does not simply exist: He acts. God talk.

We have made it plausible that in biblical theology there is no indication why theology should be seen anything less than talk about God as He indentified Himself in the history of His people. attaches His identity to them. Biblical theology shows the way of talking about God and His identity and also that to whom God speaks become the carriers of His presence in this world. The nature of the texts and their content puts us into a position where we can affirm that theology is indeed talk about God in a specific way about His identity. . by being in relationship they are one. by participating in the lives of His people. N° 9 into the vulnerable covenantal bond with them. but we who have heard also talk about God.138 Teoloãki åasopis. Therefore we see no reason why theologians should abandon theology as God talk. as not being God talk. The history of Israel. To follow Adriaanse and denounce theology. The texts give voice to those human experiences. which tell of God and who He is. So there is a concrete place where not only God speaks. would be to ignore these texts and what they say about God. is YHWH’s history in their interrelated identities. as the cumulative experiences of those whose lives have been addressed. the participants become one and share the same history. This is the reason why knowing God is not a matter of epistemology but of history. YWHW. Even though they are two different people. humanity and the world. touched and defined by this God. Just like a married couple.

Anselm.. Beek van de. Amsterdam/Meppel: Boom. 1981. Bruggen en bruggehoofden : een keuze uit de artikelen en voordrachten van prof. trans. H. Het verschijnsel theologie. Leertouwer. Adriaanse. Theologie en Rationaliteit: Godsdienstwijsgerige bijdragen.O.. with a reply on behalf of the fool by Gaunilo and the author’s reply to Gaunilo. Een pleidooi voor een bevindelijk-pneumatologische fundering van kerk en theologie. .. L... 1982. H. dr. Flesseman-van Leer. en uitgeg. Barth..v. Die Kirchliche Dogmatik.J. van Gennep en W.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 139 Bibliography Adriaanse. vol I. Berkhof. Berkhof uit de jaren 1960-1981 / verz.J.g. 2002.. zijn afscheid als kerkelijk hoogleraar te Leiden . Barth. M. 1987. H. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Proslogion: 1965. F. E. Protestant Theology in the Nineteenth Century. Zürich: EVZ-Verlag. K. 1988. Charlesworth. H.A. A.. red. K. H. 1932-1938 Edition. Rede uitgesproken bij aanvaarding van het ambt van hoogleraar vanwege de Nederlandse Hervormde Kerk bij de Rijksuniverstieit te Leiden op 18 juni 1982. Over de wetenschapelijke status van de theologie. Krop. Nijkerk: Callenbach. t. Kampen: Kok. Nijkerk: Callenbach. Verdonk. New Grand Rapids/Cambridge: Eerdmans. E. God kennen – met God leven.J.

An Introduction. 2nd Ed. R. Oxford: Blackwell. 2003. London: Routledge. A.) Karl Popper. Popper. [reprint of the 1831 ed. Critical Assessments of Leading Philosophers.W. O’Hear. 1997. McGrath. “Offenbarung. 2002. (ed.. Systematic Theology. Schwöbel.E. London: Routledge. H. 2004.. Oxford: Oxford University Press. A. 1.R.. J. Grenz.140 Teoloãki åasopis. Christian Theology... Conjectures and Refutations... vol. Kampen: Kok.]. K. 1997. Schleiermacher. The Triune God. Christelijk Geloof. 1963.D. The Growth of Scientific Knowledge.. Der christliche Glaube nach den Grundsätzen der evangelischen Kirche im Zusammenhange dargestellt. Jenson. II Religionphilosophisch” RGG4 /VI . Theology for the Community of God. vol. Berlin: De Gruyter.1. 8e druk. C. S. F.. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.E. N° 9 Berkhof. 2000.

One. therefore would not expect religion to play a positive role in the process of reconciliation between Islamic Bosnian Muslims and Catholic Bosnian Croats. Religious Anthropology. Conflict. Bosnia and Hercegovina. Evangelical believers do not fit in any of the main people groups because the main criterion for belonging to a group is religious background.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 141 UDK 284. However. . This can serve as a first step in the process of reconciling conflicting groups. Identity. there are religious groups that can contribute to the peace-building efforts.6Mostar) Praying on the Front-Line Religion. The Evangelical church is therefore a neutral place where people with different ethnic identities can meet each other. Peace-building. In a post-war city like Mostar in Bosnia and Hercegovina religious identity is one of the main markers of division between different groups. This article discusses reconciliation in the Evangelical church in Mostar. Key words: Religion. However. Identity and Reconciliation in the Evangelical Church in Mostar Abstract: Religion is seen by many as one of the main causes of the conflict between people in the Balkans. This church plays an interesting role in a society that is characterised by clearly divided groups. reconciliation in itself is not an intentional objective of the church.991(497. Ethnicity. Reconciliation. Evangelical Church. Mostar.

Strangely enough the symbol for unity is a statue of kung fu legend Bruce Lee. At first sight this subject may seem contradictory in itself. but my primary focus in this article is on the contribution of religion and religious groups to the reconciliation process. Serbs and Croats alike (Zaitchik.142 Teoloãki åasopis. . The constant threat of attacks in all major cities in Europe has its impact 1 In the English literature the term Bosnia is normally used for the country as a whole. 2006). The statue showed Lee in a typical fighting pose. Instead of using the full name of the state: Bosnia and Herzegovina. People from Herzegovina. N° 9 Introduction Ten years after the violent ethnic conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina1 came to an end. I will mainly use the abbreviation BiH throughout this article. Religion and religious groups in the Balkans are usually associated with conflict rather than with reconciliation. This peculiar choice shows how hard it is to find a suitable symbol for unity in the complex situation of this country. The tension between Islamic cultures and the western world is still in the news on a daily basis. The argument for choosing Bruce Lee is that he is worshipped by Muslims. where I did my research. The first reason is related to the current global political situation. A lot of attention has been given to the way religion was used as justification of violence in the war at the end of the 20<^th century in former Yugoslavia. It may seem strange to look for reconciliation in a religious group. This subject is relevant to many people for several reasons. I will make it explicit. The terrorist attacks on New York. when I specifically intend to say something about the Bosnian. Madrid and London almost ten years ago have shocked the world. a monument for unity had been erected in Mostar. or the Herzegovinian part of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The main subject of this article is the role of reconciliation between people from different ethnic groups in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. I do not want to deny the contribution of religion to the conflict. However. see themselves as Herzegovinians rather than Bosnians.

this subject is also relevant to those working for grass roots organisations doing peace building. for centuries. In the church where I did my research. the debate about the Bosnian conflict between Muslims and Christians speaks into the debates about this same conflict in other parts of the world. Cities like Sarajevo and Mostar have a long history of dealing with different religions and cultures within its boundaries. When I write about the Evangelical Church I mean the group of people that comes to activities organised by the church on a regular basis . into a symbol of cultural and religious conflict. though I am fully aware that this study is a mere starting point. This act of destruction changed what had. Reconciliation is one of the main objectives of many humanitarian organisations There is a lot of discussion about the possible strategies that can be used to achieve reconciliation. Terrorist attacks throughout the world raise questions about religious and cultural tolerance and the way ethno-religious groups can live alongside each other. It is not my objective to define who is a true evangelical and who is not. With this article I hope to contribute to this discussion. In 1993 the old Ottoman bridge of Mostar was destroyed before the eyes of the world. I think it is impossible to draw . For centuries the Balkans have been the bridge between Christian and Islamic culture. The rebuilding of the bridge has accordingly become a symbol of reconciliation. Apart from the topicality of religion and reconciliation on a global scale. been a symbol of religious and cultural tolerance.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 143 on the debate about pluralistic and multi-ethnic societies. either in the Balkans or anywhere else in the world. It is hard to define the boundaries of an Evangelical Church. I have chosen to do my research in a small church. no defined membership exists. Although the context in BiH is different from most other places in the world. The specific context of the Evangelical Church in Mostar naturally makes it hard to generalise any conclusions. The central question in this article is ‘What is the role of the reconciliation process between people from different ethnic groups in the Evangelical Church in Mostar?’ My focus is on reconciliation in the Evangelical Church in Mostar.

five sub-questions need to be looked at. The role of reconciliation in a church is very dependent on the specific circumstances. This does not mean that my findings are of no value for any other context. Churches differ from place to place and the church in Mostar differs in many ways from a church in Amsterdam or even in Sarajevo. Nevertheless. • How do people in Mostar in general construct their identity? • How do evangelical Christians in Mostar construct their identity? • What role does ethnicity play in the church? • What kind of relationships do evangelical Christians from different ethnic backgrounds have in Mostar? • In what way does the Evangelical Church actively support reconciliation? . In order to be able to draw any conclusions on a reconciliation process in the Evangelical Church. the answers to my questions are based on the specific situation of the conducted research. Reconciliation can have a comparable role in various contexts. N° 9 conclusions about the role of reconciliation in churches in general.144 Teoloãki åasopis.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

145

Conceptual Framework
Some of the concepts that have been used in this article could be confusing and their boundaries need to be defined. A first concept that needs clarification is religion. The role of religion in the Balkan conflicts is often debated. For a good understanding of the role of religion and religious groups in the processes of both conflict and reconciliation, it is necessary to explain how I define religion in this context. There are many definitions of religion in use, but the discussion on the definition has two extremes2. On one of the spectrum scholars define religion by the function it has in society. From this functionalistic perspective religion is for example everything that is used to give man a higher purpose in life. The difficulty with definitions like this is that the existence of religion is explained by its function. Religion is in this way reduced to a human functional construct. On the other end of the spectrum are the scientists that use a substantial definition of religion. A famous example is Tylor’s definition. He states that ‘religion is the belief in spiritual beings’ (Lambek, 2002: 21). This definition comes close to the popular use of the word religion in common parlance. In this perspective there is hardly any attention for the function religion fulfils in society. The focus is on the substantial characteristics of religion. In theology this last approach to religion is more common. In the social sciences there is more attention on the functional aspects of religion. It is not surprising that most anthropologists use a more functional definition of religion, because anthropology has human behaviour in society as its object of study. In the analysis of processes of conflict and reconciliation in a religious group it makes sense to use a functional definition of religion. But I want to avoid giving the impression that I see religion as a human construct. In this article I give an anthropological perspective
2 I divide the definitions of religion in substantial and functional definitions following Berger (Berger 1967: 194). In the first appendix to The Sacred Canopy, Berger discusses the sociological definitions of religion.

146

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

and therefore my focus is unavoidably on the functional aspects of religion. Religion is part of the total framework of systems of meaning making that people use to define their position in reality. Religion can therefore be seen as a part of culture. Religion is that part of culture that is connected to the belief in a supernatural reality. A human being is capable of constructing religion and reshaping religion. On the other hand religion has impact on the way people think and act. It is therefore of crucial importance in the way people deal with issues of conflict and reconciliation. The second concept that needs some clarification is identity. Just like religion, the word identity is often used without a clarified meaning. Identity seems to be a fashionable topic and only a few decennia ago the concept was hardly ever used in the social sciences. Identity is becoming more important, because boundaries are becoming less clear. People have to find out who they are and to which group they belong. Identity says on the one hand something about the essence of a group or a person. On the other hand the concept has to do with the outside boundaries that separate one entity from another. Identity plays a role when clear boundaries are sought. When a group wants to distinguish itself from a different group, it will stress its identity. In this case identity has to do with difference. In other cases identity plays a binding role. The concept is then used to stress things that members of a group have in common. In this case identity has to do with similarity. These two aspects, difference and similarity, are central to identity. This shows why it is such a multifaceted concept. I define identity as the common aspects of a group that distinguish one group from others. It should be noted that every person has multiple identities and these change over time (Lifton 1995: 1-20). The boundaries of group identities run through groups that have a shared identity. Let me illustrate this with an example from Mostar. A Christian teenager who lives in West Mostar and comes from a Muslim background has multiple conflicting identities. He is young, ethnic Muslim, religiously Christian, West Mostarian, Herzegovinian etcetera. In different situations this person will stress different identities. In one situations he might focus on the characteristics he shares with certain

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

147

people and in different situations he might stress those things that distinguish him from these same people. In the complex situation where religion, nationality and ethnicity are all intertwined, identity plays a crucial role. When we look at conflict and reconciliation we have to take notion of the complex system of identities and the ways these are constructed. It has much impact on the way groups and individuals interact. In everyday use, identity is often regarded as something static. People have one identity and it never changes. It is important to realise that people think about identity in this way. The ideas that people have about identity have impact on the way they behave and these ideas form a part of the social reality that I study (Baumann, 1999: 81-96). There is no point in neglecting the existence of these ideas even though I think these ideas are based on a misunderstanding of identity. In the analysis of social developments in BiH it is impossible to neglect the concept of ethnicity. Ethnicity is a form of identity. It is the identity of a group that sees itself as being culturally distinctive from other groups. Eriksen points to the fact that for ethnicity to come about, groups must at least have some form of social contact (Eriksen, 2002: 12). Ethnicity is a relational concept and not the property of a group. A strong tendency exists throughout BiH to essentialise ethnicity and therefore people’s ethnic identities. According to most people a person is Croat, Serb or Muslim. Birth determines to which of these groups one belongs. Every group claims to have a separate origin and history. This essentialist understanding of ethnicity is for a great deal based on myths of clearly distinguishable people groups (Baumann, 1999: 65, 66). Dubious interpretations of history often form the basis for these ideas. An example of this is the conviction that exists throughout BiH about the history of the Bosnian Church during the Middle Ages. Many times during my fieldwork, people tried to convince me of the fact that their ancestors had been Bogomils. To them this was proof of the Bosnians not being Catholics like the Croats. The actual historical evidence for this assumption is minimal. Nevertheless, many Bosnian Muslims still believe this. For them it is part of the justification of an independent Bosnian state. This exemplifies how people interpret history to draw

148

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

sharp boundaries between ethnic groups. These boundaries are quite problematic in BiH, because it is hard to distinguish Croats, Serbs and Muslims from each other. They all generally have the same appearance and until the war they spoke the same Serbo-Croatian language. The only clear difference is their religious conviction. and this difference is therefore strongly articulated. Religion is not only used to distinguish one from the other, it also serves as a moral justification for hatred towards the other group. Although I believe that this essentialist idea of ethnicity is based on questionable argumentations, I do believe it strongly influences developments in BiH and still continues to do so. It is interesting to see that ethnic groups in BiH point to their long separate histories, while at the same time differences are being created in the present. The separate languages, for example, are a recent phenomenon. As I have said earlier, people are being transformed by the systems of meaning making that they construct themselves.

Research Methods3
In order to find answers to the question under consideration I undertook anthropological research. The research methods I chose are typically for cultural anthropology. Most of my findings stem from the material I collected in fieldwork I did in the first half of 2005 in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. To find answers to the formulated questions I conducted qualitative research. This seemed the most suitable method to find answers to my questions. Relationships between people in a church can hardly be studied through surveys or other quantitative methods. Furthermore, many of my questions regard personal experiences. Building a relationship of trust is of crucial importance to achieve insight in people’s convictions. From February till June 2005 I stayed in Mostar and became part of the local Evangelical Church. Subsequently participant observation became my main
3 The research was part of my studies at the Social and Cultural Anthropology department of the Vrije Universiteit in Amsterdam.

relatively many foreigners came to church. . drinking coffee or just walking on the street5. This was a good way to speak with people about various matters. It was important to get to know people from the church also on a personal level. I have tried to integrate into the church as much as possible. All names of informants in this article are fictitious. like I said before. Most of them were aid workers and missionaries. The data obtained from interviews may perhaps be clear but less reliable. I visited many official church-activities like Sunday services.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 149 research method. Next to participant observation I also used interviews as a research method. bible studies and worship meetings. creating confidential relationships is crucial for qualitative research. youth meetings. 4 Usually. The big drawback of this is that the interview setting is somewhat unnatural. people regarded me as just another foreigner in church4. 5 Drinking coffee and walking around in town are the main pastimes among the Mostarians. it was harder for me to get in contact with them. Most of them had never heard of anthropology and had no clue what my research was about. I have interviewed mostly young people and church leaders. Therefore I spent a lot of time with people in smaller groups and one-on-one. Although the people in the church knew I was doing research. The older people in church are mostly women and. It was harder for me to get in contact with older women in church. One advantage of interviewing over mere observation is that it produces very clear data. but also many informal activities like birthdays and barbecues. In the four months I spent in Mostar I successfully integrated in the church and created some good relationships. As I said. For me as a young man it was easiest to get in contact with young people and mostly with men. This has to do with the demographic composition of the church.

N° 9 Identity The war has turned Mostar into a divided city. This is not only the case among politicians but also among ordinary people. One person helps building the house of his brother in exchange for another service. It is often via friends or family that people acquire a job or legal permission to start a business or build a house. In the complex situation of Mostar essentialist ideas about ethnicity and religion are both present and problematic. In BiH and in Mostar many people have an essentialist approach towards ethnicity. Being part of a network offers people practical opportunities. One is labelled a Muslim or a Christian. belonging to a network also provides a feeling of security. or the categorisation of people into strictly defined groups. It is assumed that all Muslims are alike and that it has always been like that. Notions of belonging are of crucial significance to people in general and especially in Mostar. Apart from practical advantages. 1999: 67). ethnicity and nationality are markers used to define one’s identity. An essentialist approach of ethnicity and religion freezes the conflict between groups and it closes the gates for reconciliation. In his book ‘The Multicultural Riddle’ Baumann clearly shows how essentialist ideas have developed and what the results are: ‘Ethnicity and ethno-politics rely on rhetorics that trace cultural differences to biological differences. Religions are often being divided along strict lines. Religion. In BiH this is more the case than in many Western countries. further strengthen essentialist ideas. they aim at purifying and canonizing the cultural essences that they have reified…’ (Baumann.150 Teoloãki åasopis. These groups have formed strong and opposing identities. It also widened the gap between groups. and identity construction. Many Mostarians aspire to belong to clearly restricted groups. Identity politics. The war has not only geographically divided Mostar in two. I am aware of the danger of an essentialist approach. Together people form a network in which personal interests are looked after. A policeman will not fine one of his friends. Religion is being essentialised in similar ways. In this section I will discuss ethnic and religious identity. People feel safe in the street when they .

Religion defines a person’s ethnic group. Otherwise anthropological fieldwork would . 1999: 85) Also Evangelical Christians do not really fit in one of the main categories in Mostar. refugees and displaced persons often have no clear idea about to which group they belong. With all these exceptions it seems impossible to have an essentialist approach to religion or ethnicity in Mostar. Children from mixed marriages. or Croatian identity. I will separately discuss Croatian. This way of discussing identity assumes an essentialist understanding of both ethnicity and religion. 1995: 198). It is impossible to give a definition of a Croat. but at the same time a person’s religion is determined by a one’s ethnicity. 1999: 64). but still many people do. Belonging to a group offers human security in precarious situations. Nationality and ethnicity are not very clear categories and many people are confused about the boundaries of categories. There is much variety within these categories and moreover they are constantly being transformed. Bringa states that her book ‘contains ethnographic data which are now history’ (Bringa. The way Muslims perceived their religion before the war has totally been transformed by the war. The unstable condition of a divided post-war city like Mostar creates a need for strongly attached groups. on several occasions a people would answer: “I am a Christian”. (Baumann. I clearly want to acknowledge that both religion and ethnicity are mainly human constructs. When I asked a person about his ethnicity. as Baumann calls them. In her book ‘Being Muslims the Bosnian way’.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 151 know that they are part of the same group as others. At the same time this is not easy in Mostar. this hope is reinforced by the affirmation of people around them. Religion is for most people in Mostar the factor that determines to which group they belong. or ‘eccentrics’. Nevertheless I will try to give a general picture of ethnic and religious identity in the way I encountered it in Mostar. Croatian culture. Seeing ethnicity and religion as human constructs that show much diversity and change over time does not make them less real (Baumann. The amount of people that form an exception in some way or another. Furthermore people feel supported in their convictions by others. is large in Mostar. If a person for example believes in life after death. Muslim and Evangelical identity.

On the Hum Mountain south-west of Mostar. Croats and Muslims managed to live in peaceful coexistence for a long period of time. The city has a long history of ethnic tolerance. the surrounding region lacks much diversity. N° 9 not make any sense.152 Teoloãki åasopis. and identity of evangelicals in Mostar. The erected religious buildings form a conspicuous mark of the division. an enormous cross was erected in 2000. After that I will discuss separately Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian Croat identity. Bosnian Muslim and evangelical. Everyone who visits Mostar for the first time is immediately confronted with the wounds of the war. It is important to realise that although Mostar had a very diverse population. Serbs. Just like BiH reflects the complex mixture of peoples of the former Yugoslavia. West and East Mostar had been ethnically cleansed: The west side was almost totally Croatian. The region east of Mostar is a Serb dominated area. a person can at the same time be Mostarian. Different groups overlap here and people have multiple identities. Many destroyed buildings around the old front line form a visible scar. Constructing Identity in Mostar: Communal Factors A number of factors have significant influence on the way identity is being constructed in Mostar as a whole. Minarets and the colossal church tower of one of the catholic cathedrals define the skyline of Mostar. In this section I will first discuss factors in identity construction in Mostar as a whole. For example. One cannot walk through Mostar without seeing this cross. Nearly all Serbs had fled the city. so Mostar can be seen as a small scale BiH. the east . The war has changed the face of Mostar beyond recognition. Neither can one walk through Mostar without hearing the loud sound of the prayer call from the minarets’ speakers that are turned towards the west side of town. West of Mostar lives a vast Croat majority. My research population consisted of the evangelical community in Mostar. The people in the church were part of larger ethnic groups.

The city was turned into a depressive scene. The return of refugees did not go as fast in the first years after the war in Mostar as elsewhere in the country. which function as separate bodies. All bridges across the Neretva. In east side schools pupils learn Bosnian . These elections were the first in BiH after the Dayton Agreements. At the same time a multi-ethnic police force was established. 2002: 112). There was not much left of the once so pretty town of Mostar. The representation was based on the pre-war demographic composition of Mostar. Citizens of Mostar voted strongly along nationalistic lines. although pupils can choose for ethics instead. In June 1996 the first municipal elections were held in Mostar. Some important steps towards unification were taken in the first few years after the war. The same can be said of many institutions. The EUAM (European Union Administration of Mostar) had the difficult task of supervising the initial reconstruction and the reintegration of Mostar (Bose. Another important development in the reintegration process was the introduction in 1998 of one currency: the convertible mark (Bose. Schools on the west side have a curriculum that differs from east side schools. People from surrounding villages had taken their places (Bose. Around the front-line all major buildings were ruined. It breathed death and destruction. but this was not much more than a formality. Many young and educated people with opportunities had left Mostar and the country. In practice the west and the east have separate police forces. 106). Croatian history and have catholic religious classes. One of them was the introduction of common license plates for cars so people could travel through the city freely. 2002: 108).Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 153 side had become almost 100% Muslim. The character of the city had changed tremendously. In west side schools pupils learn Croatian language. Not much was left of the old Ottoman centre of town. including ‘stari most’ were destroyed. 2002: 105. After the elections a local city council was formed with representatives from all ethnic groups. An important element of division in Mostar is the educational system.

154

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

language6 Bosnian history and have Islamic religious classes. The gymnasium on Spanish Square in the centre of Mostar is the only school that uses curricula for both Muslims and Croats. This school is the pride of the international community, often given as an example of the success of reintegration Mostar. It is disappointing to see though that even here still classes are separated and that Croatian and Muslim children do not have much mutual contact. Mostar also has two universities, one on the east side and one on the west side. Between the two hardly any cooperation exists. East and West Mostar are marked by division and the two function in many ways as separate cities. Globalisation is another factor that has impact on identity in Mostar as a whole. In his book on globalisation and identity, Appadurai points to the effect of globalisation on, amongst others, BiH (Appadurai, 1999: 305-324). He substantiates that globalisation brings about insecurity in people’s ideas on what their identity is. Old divisions have become less strict and maintaining a specific local identity becomes harder due to the constant influx of information from other parts of the world. According to Appadurai the insecurity about people’s identity is one of the main driving forces behind the horrible violence that came to BiH in the war. Clear boundaries between groups have become more fluid as a result of globalisation. Another result of globalisation; the increase of recourses of information, causes a reverse dynamic. It is nowadays easier for a Muslim in Mostar to feel part of a global Muslim community, than it was 20 years ago. The same can be said of Catholics. Television and Internet enlarge knowledge and awareness of worldwide connections and antagonisms. The growing conflict between the Western world and the Islamic world cannot stay unnoticed in BiH and Mostar. The presence of a large group of foreigners is another factor that impacts identity construction in Mostar as a whole. The recon6 Bosnian and Croatian language are very much alike. Before the war all people in BiH spoke Serbo-Croat. Since the war separate languages exist, although the differences seem in many cases artificial.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

155

struction of BiH after the Dayton agreement attracted many international organisations. Chandler calls BiH the world’s capital of interventionism (Chandler, 1999: 2). People are more and more fed up with the aid of the international community, but at the same time the city became strongly dependent on this foreign aid. Without aid Mostar would turn into an administrative chaos. Reconstruction would stop and for example public transport would probably collapse7 The international community plays a dual role in people’s lives. This relationship of dependency and contempt with the international community also impacts the way Mostarians view themselves and others.

Bosnian Muslim Identity
As I have said earlier, it is difficult say anything about an ethnic group without falling into the pitfall of essentialism. One is inclined to use generalisations. An advantage of my research is that my informants are part of a group that does not seem to fit into any system of categorisation. The Bosnian Muslims form an exception in a predominantly Christian continent. The Bosnian Muslims also form an exception in the Islamic community. Religion is practised in a highly unorthodox way, especially because religion has been suppressed in the communist period. Muslims in the Middle East do not have much in common with Muslims in BiH. I did my fieldwork in an Evangelical Church. The Bosnian Muslims that are part of this church can be seen as an exception to an exceptional group, because although they see themselves as part of the Bosnian Muslim ethnic community, they themselves are Christians8 An oversimplified categorisation is hardly possible in this case. I will first try to give a rough
7 All buses in Mostar have a Japanese flag painted on the side, under which it says that the bus is financed by the Japanese government. 8

The vocabulary is confusing in this matter. Bosnian Muslims form first of all an ethnic category and not a religious category. For most people in this group Islam is used as the main marker in

156

Teoloãki åasopis, N° 9

sketch of the Bosnian Muslim community of Mostar. After that I will describe the Bosnian Muslims in the Evangelical Church. The town of Mostar has a population of about 100,000 people. Approximately half of the population consists of Bosnian Muslims. Although the Muslims of BiH can hardly be compared to Muslims in the Middle East or Turkey, there are many elements in Bosnian Muslim culture that one can trace back to the period of Ottoman occupation. The architecture of the old centre of Mostar and of the biggest part of the east bank differs from the architecture in West Mostar. The Muslim parts of town have small streets with many houses built close together. Some of the architecture has oriental elements. The most important piece of Ottoman architecture is of course the Old Bridge (Stari Most). In the small shops around the Old Bridge Turkish-like artefacts are being sold and Turkish coffee is being served in bars where people play tavla9 In this part of town you hear people say ‘alaikum’as a greeting to each other. Walking around in Mostar’s old town feels a bit like walking in an open-air museum. It does not give a very accurate picture of the everyday life of Bosnian Muslims. In most parts of town one cannot tell which person is a Muslim and which is not. The only Islamic law that is strictly observed is the probation to eat pork. Only a very small proportion of the women wear a head-scarf. The secular character of most Bosnian

their ethnic identity. I use the word term Bosnian Muslim also for those people this group who have converted to Christianity. In most literature the confusion is overcome by using the term Bosniak instead of Bosnian Muslim. This term is hardly ever used by any of my informants. Bosnian Muslims who converted to Christianity nevertheless see themselves mostly as belonging to the ethnic group of Bosnian Muslims. I have chosen to use this emic categorisation. Using the term Bosniak would oversimplify the matter. It is a mixed up reality, not only for the lay outsider, but also for many of my informants themselves.
9

A Turkish board game similar to backgammon.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet

157

Muslims has to do with the suppression of religion during the communist period. For a long period of time Muslims were not recognised as an ethnic group of their own. Croats considered them converted Croats, Serbs saw them as converted Serbs. During the Yugoslav period there were no Islamic schools. Muslims from the cities differ in many ways from Muslims in the villages. Bringa shows that traditions play a stronger role in villages than in the cities (Bringa, 1995). A good example in her account is the fact that women change clothes when they go into town. In town they cannot wear their traditional clothes. Of course the situation has changed since Bringa did her research, but I do think that traditions are still much stronger in the villages than in towns like Mostar. In the last 15 years interest in Islam has grown in BiH. The first cause of this development lies in the war. The war hardened the borders between ethnic groups and as I stated before, religion is one of the main markers of difference between groups in BiH. Bosnian Muslim identity is articulated through a shared interest in Islam. A second reason why Islam is taken more seriously recently stems from the global conflict between the west and the Muslim world. People are forced to take sides in this debate. A third cause of the recent revival of Islam in BiH is the financial support that comes from Islamic countries and from Islamic communities in Europe. Throughout the country big mosques are being constructed with help of foreign funds. The Bosnian Muslims that I encountered do not have much interest in Islam. Most Bosnian Muslims in the Evangelical Church consider themselves Christians. However, in many ways they feel part of the Bosnian Muslim community. Their focus is on East Mostar and they speak Bosnian instead of Croatian10 They go to Muslim schools, support FK Veleæ, (the east side football team) and are proud
10

There is not much difference between Bosnian and Croatian, but the small differences are important to people. If I want to buy bread in East Mostar I have to use a totally different word for bread then in West Mostar.

158 Teoloãki åasopis. It was his son who convinced him to come to church. Sometimes Boris was studying some kind of textbook about Christianity. Apart from daily meals and cigarettes they did not have much expenditure. They also had a small plot of land where they grew some vegetables. The television was always turned on very loud. N° 9 of the country of Bosnia and Herzegovina. According to Boris. His wife is also a Bosnian Muslim and she does not go to church. Altogether it was just enough to get by. His father was an Imam in Mostar and his grandparents owned much land in the vicinity of Mostar. The Mostar he grew up in was a town where it did not matter what religious background one had. he and his family lived in Mostar. They were kicked out of their house and moved in with his sister who is now also sometimes coming to church. The majority of their family and close friends are Bosnian Muslims. although nobody was really watching. whom she met in Mostar. His parents were Partisans during the Second World War. Boris did not believe in Islam. The daily pursuits consisted mainly of drinking Bosnian coffee and smoking. During the war. he is a middle-aged man who has been going to the Evangelical Church in Mostar for a few years. One daughter has moved abroad where she got married to a former peace-force soldier. He never prayed until he became a Christian and the only reason why he regarded himself as a Bosnian Muslim was that his father told him so. They lived in a small house with their two sons and two daughters and one grandson. Mostar used to be the best city of the whole of Yugoslavia. Apparently the family lived on support from this daughter and from the church. Boris grew up in the old town of Mostar. Just after I left Mostar the oldest son started to look after some goats. . The only big difference is that their religious identity is Christian. He became a Christian after the war. He went to communist schools in Mostar and in Montenegro. The house they lived in was only half finished. It seemed like the work on the first floor and the roof had stagnated a while ago. Costs of living are not so high. Boris’ father died when Boris was young. Neither Boris nor his wife had regular jobs. They received help from a humanitarian organisation that was connected to the Evangelical Church. Although his father had been a religious leader. A good example is Boris.

. I do not think Islam played a significant role in his life. mainly through humanitarian aid. The town of Medjugorje is one of the world’s largest places of pilgrimage. They say that these Bosnian Croats are more Croatian than the Croats in Zagreb. Even the smallest villages in this region have a Catholic church building. Although they definitely consider themselves as Bosnian Muslims. Bosnian Croats are proud to be catholic and are in many ways devoted to the church. Catholicism is the most important marker of identity. they have a marginal position in this community. I think this joke tells a lot about the way ethnic identity is being articulated by Bosnian Croats in Mostar. It is also typical that he was not very religious before he became a Christian. The evangelical Bosnian Muslims cannot really be considered part of the core of this ethnic group. The part of Herzegovina west of the Neretva River has been the cradle of hard-line Croatian nationalists. I have not met any Bosnian Muslims in church that were part of a family in which Islam played a very significant role11 It is striking that of the evangelical Bosnian Muslims only a small minority lives on the east side of Mostar. Most of them are relatively poor and came in contact with the church during the war or shortly after. Bosnian Croat Identity In Zagreb people make fun about the Bosnian Croats in Western Herzegovina. The red and white chequered flag hangs from almost every lamppost.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 159 Boris’ situation is in many ways typical of most of the Bosnian Muslims that come to church. His upbringing had been more communist than Islamic and his father died when Boris was still really young. Every year thousands of Catholics from all over the world come to Medjugorje be- 11 Although Boris’ father had been an Imam.

160 Teoloãki åasopis. During my stay Pope John Paul II died. One of the highest Church towers in Europe has been built in Mostar and as I mentioned before the giant Cross on mount Hum is visible from every corner of town.000 Bosnian Croats in Mostar seem to be wealthier than their east side neighbours. Faith is connected to the Croatian nation in a very direct way. N° 9 cause of the supposed apparitions of Maria since 198112 In Mostar Catholicism also plays an important role in the expression of Croatian identity. Masses are being attended frequently by most Bosnian Croats. . The 50. On the whole. the opposite is true for West Mostar. even at night. at least among most Catholics. This is visible from the cars that people drive and the clothes that people wear. Bosnian Croats celebrate this by driving around town waving Croatian flags. the atmosphere in West Mostar is much more similar to Western Europe than it is in East Mostar. Secularisation as in Western Europe seems nearly absent in present day Herzegovina. Although most tourist businesses are mainly centred in the old Ottoman part of town. When there is a sports event the Bosnian Croats are always supporting the Croatian teams and when BiH looses a football match. Where East Mostar has many narrow streets. This was reason for a lot of grief in West Mostar. On a wall in West Mostar somebody has put this clearly into words with spray-paint: od is Croatian The architectural differences between West and East Mostar are striking. when it is illuminated. Most of the streets are much wider and there are many big apartment blocks. The commercial centre is much more developed than on the east side. Bosnian Croats seem to feel related more to Croatia than to BiH. Most of the Bosnian Croats that I interviewed for my re12 The work of Bax (Bax: 1995) provides an extensive anthropological analysis of the developments of the catholic regime in Medjugorje. most of the other economical activity is to be found in West Mostar. Two big shopping malls have been built after the war where almost anything is for sale that one could buy in Western Europe.

for Bosnian Croats there is more to loose. She is a 25-year-old Bosnian Croatian woman. She says about her ethnic background: "I can’t say that I’m not glad that I’m Croatian. that is really a lot easier for me…I don’t really hate anyone. Sunday morning they go to the mass with their families. Helena lives in West Mostar and has a fairly good job. Joining the Evangelical Church did not really mean a break with the church or with her family. because it would cause big problems within their family. or I don’t hate Serbs. but I’m glad I’m Croatian. Many of the young people that come to worship meetings on Wednesdays have never told their family about their baptism. In the previous section I said that most Evangelical Bosnian Muslims do not live in East Mostar. Taking this step would implicate a big risk. Half of my family is Orthodox. even though their relationship with the Catholic Church was quite exceptional. It is interesting that all Bosnian Croats that had some connection to the Evangelical Church do live in West Mostar. They keep their involvement with evangelical Christians a secret. I am for a lot of stuff…I live here on the west side and it’s a lot nicer. For this reason it is impossible for most of them to come to the Evangelical Church on Sunday. I don’t hate Muslims. She was baptised in the Evangelical Church in 1996. The majority of the Bosnian Croats I interviewed are part of families that are better of than the families of Bosnian Muslims in Church. For other Bosnian Croats who are involved in the Evangelical Church this is a lot more problematic. but I am glad that I am Croatian. Breaking with the Catholic Church would cause a break with their family and it would mean a betrayal of their ethnic group.” Before Helena became part of the Evangelical Church she only went to the Catholic Church at Easter and Christmas. I hang around with both. . Therefore. I have a Croatian Passport. Helena is an interesting example.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 161 search were in many ways proud to be Croatian.

for many individuals it is not so clear. The church has no official membership. It is therefore very important for the evangelical Christians in Mostar that they belong to the evangelical Christian community. I have separately discussed the identity of Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats. Some of the pastors in BiH have studied at the evangelical theological seminary in Osijek in Croatia. As I have said before.162 Teoloãki åasopis. For example. In BiH there are two main denominations of protestant churches: Baptist churches and Evangelical/Pentecostal churches. although it is clear that some people are definitely part of the church and some are not. The church in Mostar was founded by Christians from Croatia (Kelly and Sheppard. N° 9 Evangelical Identity in Mostar So far. It is hard to define the Evangelical Church. This denomination is connected to the Evangelical Churches in Croatia. Although all of them saw themselves as part of an ethnic group that transcended the church. There are no clear boundaries that determine who is in and who is out. During my fieldwork I have visited many different meetings. Religious background determines the group a person belongs to. Many people are in some way or another involved in the church. religion is the main determinant for most people in Mostar to distinguish between ethnic groups. At all these meetings I met different groups of people. others only came to one particular kind of meeting. It is therefore really difficult to estimate how big this group of evangelical Christians is. However. some young people only come to the youth meetings on Sunday night. The church in Mostar that I studied is part of the denomination of Evangelical/Pentecostal churches in BiH. and many people only come once in a while to activities organised by the church. all of them differ from the majority of their ethnic group when it comes to religion. other young people only come to worship meetings on . There is no Baptist church in Mostar. Since I did my fieldwork in the Evangelical Church. Some people come to almost every meeting. 1995). This was for many of them of crucial importance for the way they constructed their identity. almost all my informants were in some way or another involved with the Evangelical Church in Mostar.

13 There are refugee camps in the vicinity of Mostar. The people that come to church activities come from a very mixed ethnical background. Sometimes 25 people come. On Wednesday evening worship meetings the majority of attendants is Bosnian Croat. Significantly. Just like any other social group the Evangelical Church has core members and members that take a less central position. Most of the people that come to church did not have much education. Most of the young people are still in school except for some of the refugees. the Evangelical Church in Mostar has two church buildings: one in East and one in West Mostar. A normal Sunday morning church service is usually attended by Bosnian Muslims. The pastor of the church is from a mixed Serb/Croat background. . People from both East and West Mostar are attending the Brankovac church meetings. I did most of my research in the Brankovac church in East Mostar. Many of the refugees are illiterate. On average around 30 to 40 people come to these meetings. but some activities there are attended by people from both congregations. In each of the buildings meetings are being held. Kosovo Albanians. Most evangelicals in the Mostar church are people with limited opportunities. Hardly any students come to church although there are two universities in Mostar. Bosnian Croats. On these meetings there is usually not one dominant ethnic group. Usually about 8-10 people come to these meetings and they are all young people. sometimes only a handful show up. Most people that live in these camps have come from Kosovo and some from Macedonia.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 163 Wednesday night and some come to both. Many people are without a job or have low paid jobs. Gypsies and some people from England and the United States. On youth meetings on Sunday evening the majority of people is usually Bosnian Muslim and a relatively big group of refugees from other parts of the Balkans attend these meetings13 The number of people that come to these meetings changes a lot.

In the first place the foreigners add up to the international character of the church. Usually these groups come during the summer to work for one of the charity organisations. Most of these people work in Mostar as missionaries for charity organisations. called Novi Most. 14 http://www. or both of the parents come to church.S.html . The way a service is organised.S. This international character of the church gives the members the idea that they are part of a trans-national network. Most of the time only those come of whom one. says for example:‘The vision of Novi Most International is to see young people in Bosnia Herzegovina bringing hope to their country by being instruments of positive transformation.novimost. Most young people that come to meetings do not go to the church service on Sunday morning.. The presence of people from Western Europe and the U. N° 9 Most men in the church are under 25 and in general men are a minority in most church activities. Many of them have been in Bosnia for more than 5 years. the way in which people pray. the songs that are sung. come for a short period to Mostar.’ 14 Sometimes groups of missionaries from England or the U. Almost all the songs are translated American worship songs.A.org/page4. The vision statement of one of these organisations. Usually about 5 to 10 people from Britain and the USA come to church services on Sunday morning. Somebody once said to me: ‘You will never find any Bosnian culture in the Evangelical Church in Mostar’. The reconstruction of Mostar attracted many of these missionaries. Another relatively big share of the make-up of the church consists of foreign aid workers. God is calling this generation of young Bosnians to be agents of positive transformation of their nation.. Most of them speak some Bosnian or Croatian. This is especially the case in the West Mostar church. but also in the Brankovac church. though to a lesser degree. all are very similar to the way these things are done in a Dutch or in an American Evangelical Church. has quite a big impact on the identity of the Evangelical Church in Mostar. Most charity organisations provide humanitarian aid and combine this with evangelising activities.A.164 Teoloãki åasopis.

The Pentecostal religious network offers a similar kind of security and identity as the youth gangs do. People have told me that in the past this was more often the case. The Pentecostal churches offer an alternative trans-national network to these people. It is not surprising therefore that so many refugees have some sort of relationship with the church. Poor people are more attracted to a group that provides some material aid than rich people. In Mostar the international character of the church also provides church members with a sense of belonging to a trans-national network. In this period many people stopped coming to church. For some Muslim people it means breaking all the ties with the family. Those people that are not part of a network that gives them security and a place of belonging. Some people were challenged in their motivations for coming to church. Apart from material benefits another factor that pulls people to the church is the idea of belonging to a group that provides a secure environment is. They show that young people from El Salvador who come from poor and powerless backgrounds find security and identity in international youth gangs. For Bosnian Muslims and Croats being baptised in the Evangelical Church is seen as a betrayal of their ethnicity. Some people in church call these people ‘rice Christians’. many people came to church because of material benefits. are more easily attracted than people that already belong to such a network. The leaders in church have been cautious to render too much material aid. During and in the first few years after the war. In many ways the presence of foreigners and the contacts with foreign churches pull a specific group of people towards the church. In the last years the church has tried to make this group of rice Christians smaller. 2003). Both Croats and Muslims are very hesitant to be baptised in the even those who have been involved with the church for a long period of time. Often being outside of . Muslims see baptism as a really big step.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 165 Friedmann Marquardt and Vásquez discuss the importance of trans-national religious networks in an article on trans-national youth gangs and Pentecostal churches (Friedmann Marquardt and Vásquez. But the same is also the case for Bosnian Croats who join the Evangelical Church.

Most people in Mostar find this security in one of the two major ethnic groups. For some groups. In the Evangelical Church people not only find a safe group. an old Bosnian Muslim man. Religious identity is therefore of great importance. He was beaten up by Roman Catholics Christians. Ethnicity does not seem to play a big role in church. Another contradictory example is Mehmed. There are various possible reasons why some people do not find enough protection in one the major groups. This is the case for both Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats. They have a totally different ethnic background and just do not belong to one of the groups. During the war in Mostar he was put in a prison camp by Bosnian Croats for the simple reason that he was a Muslim. now become citizens of a heavenly kingdom.166 Teoloãki åasopis. The insecure situation of Mostar creates the need for closely-knit groups that create a secure environment. it seems obvious. For others the causes of marginality are less obvious. People from their own ethnic group see them as traitors. For these people the Evangelical Church has a lot to offer. like refugees. For this reason many refugees are outsiders in Mostar. Sometimes it is because they live outside of town. The Evangelical Church provides a safe environment for people from all ethnic groups. Many people go through difficult situations because of their choice to become part of the Evangelical Church. Just after I left Mostar a Bosnian Croat girl told her mother about her baptism. they also benefit from the presence of many international people. People that were marginalized in Mostar. Some Mostarians cannot find security in either one of these groups. Nevertheless people choose to speak out for their faith. Her mother was shocked by the news. She had kept it a secret for a long time. who wore . Furthermore it provides people with a conviction of hope. N° 9 networks and being poor go hand in hand. This brings material benefits. It also makes people part of a larger international network. From my analysis one could conclude that people exclusively come to church to improve their situation. This makes suffering in this world easier and gives people hope for a better future. sometimes they don’t have the right connections. Religion is the most important marker of identity for both of these groups. But this would not do justice to the reality that I encountered in Mostar.

people do have freedom to make personal choices. viable peace is impossible.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 167 a picture of Jesus on their uniforms. conflict resolution and peace building in BiH. both churches have a very mixed group of attendants. Most scholars focus on the importance of macro-political and macro-economical factors. As long as people do not reconcile on a local level. Much has been written about strategies of reconciliation. Reconciliation in the Evangelical Church The Evangelical Church in Mostar has two church buildings: One in East Mostar and one in West Mostar. a repetition of the disastrous events remains an unlikely but realistic possibility. I will first discuss the role of reconciliation in the church. In this prison he saw some kind of vision of Jesus. Therefore I will also describe the role of ethnicity during church activities and outside of church matter. This role has a lot to do with the way people deal with matters of ethnicity in church. After he was released from prison he decided to become a Christian and join the Evangelical Church. I wanted to know if it was real or fake unity and I wanted to know where this apparent unity came from if it happened to be real. Reconciliation Since my first encounter with evangelical Christians in BiH I have been puzzled by the fact that some people from different ethnic backgrounds seem to get along so well in this community. In this sense the church seems to take part in the division of Mostar. This example shows that although sociological factors have a lot of impact. The west side . If the conflict between normal citizens is not resolved. Nevertheless. but my primary focus is on a grassroots level. I now want to analyse the way in which I encountered reconciliation in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. The main question of this article concerns the role of the reconciliation process in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. The first time I saw a group of evangelicals worship together in unity it fascinated me.

168 Teoloãki åasopis. About nationalism of the Bosnian Croats Ivan said: “Roman Catholic background people are more connected to being Croatian and are more proud of that and while actually coming to the Evangelical Church slowly you are losing that…I would say that it’s a process. why the Evangelical Church in Mostar has two buildings. This sounds like a logical explanation for the two church buildings. That means for Bosnian Croats and for those Bosnian Muslims who live in a predominantly Christian environment and are therefore used to Christian symbolism. The church in West Mostar has a strategy of evangelism that is designed for people who live in West Mostar. you cannot change overnight and deny something that was implanted in you for such a long time. but it is incomprehensible with the fact that so many people from West Mostar go to the church on the East side. These Muslims are living in a homogeneous Muslim environment and might feel unwelcome in a church where a lot of Christian symbolism is used. At the moment most people in church do not really seem to know why there are two buildings. Nationalism and ethnic pride are not very much accepted in the Evangelical Church. In the same interview with Ivan he clearly states that from the beginning of the church. for example is not used in this church. Strangely enough a rather large proportion of the people that come to the East side church lives in West Mostar. He explained to me that both churches have a different strategy of evangelism. The Christian symbol of the cross. but that later the churches developed in a way that does not match with this strategy. The church in East Mostar was started in 1997 to create a place where Bosnian Muslims from east Mostar feel welcome. In my research I mainly focused on the church in East Mostar. . ethnicity was supposed to play a minor role in church activities. In an interview I asked Ivan. A person has to loose these things when he or she joins the church. one of the leaders of the church in Mostar. I believe that the idea of having two church buildings originated from this difference in strategy. N° 9 church is attended by a slight majority of Bosnian Croats and the East side church has a slight majority of Bosnian Muslims. People from both East and West Mostar both attend the services in this church.

For decennia communism seemed able to have relative success in uniting the different ethnic groups of Yugoslavia. During the communist period all ethnic groups in Yugoslavia lived together with the motto ‘Bratstvo i Jedinstvo’ (brotherhood and unity). In the Evangelical Church avoiding suppressing issues of ethnicity creates a situation that is comparable to the situation during the communist regime. but there are no activities organised with the aim of bringing ethnic groups closer together. The Evangelical Church tries to stay away from all political matters. During church activities Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats get along without paying attention to each other’s ethnic background. This is an interesting comparison. . Of course reconciliation with God and forgiveness play a role in church.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 169 It’s a process. Of course the violent break up of Yugoslavia has made many people sceptic about the value of this supposed unity under communist rule. but the church has an impact on the way church people construct their ethnic identity. This is seen as a spiritual goal. The foremost goal of the church is to reach people with the message of Jesus Christ. In that sense the church does play a role in the reconciliation process. This situation is a result from the fact that people are expected to loose part of their ethnic identity in church. the life of Christ living in a person and slowly those things are dying. Ivan compared the situation in the Evangelical Church to the situation during the communist period. Reconciliation between ethnic groups does not have anything to do with this spiritual goal for most people in church. People that come to church have relatively much contact with people from a different ethnic background. For the church this is too much a political matter. The church does not play an active role in promoting reconciliation between ethnic groups in Mostar. Although ethnic groups mix in the Evangelical Church. reconciliation between ethnic groups is not part of the agenda of the church. He said that people have to get along in church irrespectively of their ethnic background. This is an unintended way of bringing ethnic groups closer together.” It is not very surprising that ethnicity does not play a major role during church activities.

Furthermore there often were some people from mixed ethnic background. I have also interviewed church people about their ideas on ethnicity. this phenomenon was more the cause than the object of my research. N° 9 The next question is of course if this unity stretches beyond the walls of the church. but also on other occasions that had not much to do with the church. There are few occasions in which Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats voluntarily come together. In my research I have tried to find out if this unity that I encountered in church is also continued in the life of church people. Scepticism towards brotherhood and unity during communism has proved right. First of all I want to describe the role of ethnicity in the activities organised by the Evangelical Church. The pastor of the Brankovac church and his wife are both from a mixed Croat/Serb background. Gypsies and Serbs. Because of its clarity. In my research I have tried to find out more about what lies behind this apparent unity. The years of shared ideology could not prevent the harsh conflict that broke out in 1991. In my fieldwork I have observed people during church meetings. Usually these people were not just Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats. He explained to me that some people outside the church thought that the Evangelical Church was a church for people from a mixed background.170 Teoloãki åasopis. . At almost all activities that I visited. people were present from various ethnic backgrounds. but also Kosovo Albanians. An important question that I will discuss is therefore: how far do the relationships between people from different ethnic background in the church stretch? It could be possible that the apparent unity does not stretch beyond the church door. The Role of Ethnicity in the Life of Church People There is no need for thorough research to come to the conclusion that the Evangelical Church is a place where ethnic groups mix in a way that is uncommon outside of church.

For all those who had a leading position in the church. It was a topic that was not spoken about much. but it was not like on most other church-related activities. Most of them do not go to Sunday services in the Evangelical Church. but that they just did not have so much contact with them. Sometimes it caused a lot of confusion when I tried to find out what a person’s ethnic background was. Ethnicity is part of the old identity. The Wednesday night worship meetings where almost only visited by Bosnian Croats. be- . the worship group had evolved out of an evangelism project. but they did not have a central role during the meetings. ethnicity played a minor role. Marco. the pastor of the East side church explained to me that for many people ethnicity still plays a big role when they just start coming to church. The longer they are evangelical Christian. As one becomes part of the church. Bosnian Croat or Albanian. First of all these meetings were always held in West Mostar and therefore all the people that came lived in West Mostar. This determines the majority of their relationships. the church more and more defines one’s identity. because many people didn’t know to which group others belonged. There are several factors that explain this. Of course sometimes people for whom ethnicity is an important issue came to church activities. organised several years ago by an American missionary among Bosnian Croatian children. In the interviews I had with some of the young people who come to these worship meetings they all told me that they had no problems with Bosnian Muslims.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 171 During meetings it usually took me a while to find out people’s ethnic background. People are in the first place evangelical Christian and not Bosnian Muslim. It therefore was a solid group and it was hard for outsiders to become part of that group. On most occasions one or two people from a different background were present. Secondly. They all live in West Mostar and go to Catholic schools. Almost all the people that came to the worship meetings got involved with evangelical Christianity through this project. There is one church related activity that is not attended by a mixed group of people. As I said earlier ethnicity does not play a foremost role during church activities. the less the importance of ethnicity. Perhaps non-Croats did not feel welcome because it is such a homogeneous group of Bosnian Croats.

This is not enough to participate in the lives of all church people. The longer a person is part of the church. I also had to observe and be part of people’s life outside of church affairs. most activities are visited by an ethnically mixed group of people. the more he or she becomes part of a new network of people. They go for coffee with one another and help each other with practical matters. They actively try to get more Bosnian Croatian children involved and more children from the West Mostar schools. N° 9 cause they join their families to the mass. They wanted to get more children from West Mostar involved and therefore moved to a new location close to the former frontline. Like I said.172 Teoloãki åasopis. Before their club building had been in East Mostar. In many ways this was a difficult task. More and more 15 During my stay Novi Most moved to a new location in Mostar. Some of them also got more involved with Novi Most. Ethnicity does not seem to play a significant role in these meetings. they pray with each other and for one another. People become friends with other people they meet in church activities. One of the young people from this group started to come to church weekly and two others started to come once in a while. To get a more complete picture of people’s lives. During my research this pattern began to change. People get along with one another in church like nothing happened in the past. I only spent four months in Mostar. On the one hand it became clear to me that on the long term people build relationships in church that go beyond church matters. The worship group is exceptional because it is predominantly visited by Bosnian Croats. People from different groups talk with each other. Outside of church activities I met only a small group of people frequently and this group consisted mainly of young people. The next important question is how far this apparent peaceful coexistence stretches. an evangelical youth organisation in Mostar15 They start to build stronger relationships with other people that are involved in the Evangelical Church and this automatically means that they also develop more relationships with people from other ethnic backgrounds. . They mainly worked with Bosnian Muslims and refugees.

people also stay part of other social networks.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 173 relationships are being built of mutual dependency. I found that in many cases evangelical Christians stay attached to their ethnic group outside of church activities. Generally speaking the ethnic unification is not the same outside of church affairs as it is during church activities. Almost every time I met her she was hanging out with other young people from church. On her birthday party I did not see any Bosnian Croats. a Bosnian Croatian girl who comes to Sunday services in the Brankovac church. Her friends are mainly people from church. She has lived most of her life in West Mostar and has been going to the Evangelical Church since her early childhood. Family relationships are for many Bosnians of great importance. Outside church affairs people maintain strong relationships with people from their own ethnic group. A good example is Dijana. They maintain strong relationships with other people in their ethnic group who are not part of the Evangelical Church. Some people. Nevertheless it is striking that also the network of evangelical Bosnian Muslims that live in the Croatian part of Mostar. However. It is not surprising that most of the family members belong to the same ethnic group. predominantly consists of other Bosnian Muslims. However. Unintentionally everyone becomes part of the division and reproduces it. Dijana has a group of friends from a very . Except from some British and Americans. Most of them had been friends for a long time and in many cases there was some kind of blood-tie. a girl from a Bosnian Muslim family. For a person who lives in West Mostar and attends a school or works in this part of town. have become part of a very diverse social network. on the long term relationships will be built in the church that have an impact on people’s whole lives and also their relationships. all guests were Bosnian Muslims. In contrast to the previous example of Amela. She helps out with the youth work. In Mostar this is almost unavoidable due to the all-embracing division of the city. The church does not have much impact on these relationships. it is very difficult to build and maintain relationships with someone who lives on the other side of town. One evening I was on a birthday party of Amela. who have been going to church for a long time.

Sometimes it becomes painfully clear that ethnicity still plays an important role in people’s lives. also in the lives of evangelical Christians. He told me that the previous night. The following anecdote shows this. The situation in the Evangelical Church differs in many ways from the situation in other social groups. About a year ago he has been baptised in the Evangelical Church and ever since he has been very much involved in church matters. Amir never took revenge. Much of the division along ethnic lines that characterises present-day Mostar and BiH is not present in the Evangelical Church. One day I met Amir and he looked like he had been in a fight. A youth leader from the Evangelical Church spoke to him about how he should try to forgive the people that beat him up. where he is often the only Bosnian Muslim among Bosnian Croats. N° 9 diverse ethnic background. Then the group started to beat him up because they knew he was a Bosnian Muslim. Many organisations in Mostar attempt to create spaces where Bosnian Muslims and . and his relationship with Bosnian Croat friends has not changed. when he was walking around in West Mostar. He also goes to Wednesday night worship meetings. which he did not have. Young people grow up with the division and sooner or later it will affect them in some way. He loves going to these worship meetings. No one can completely avoid it.174 Teoloãki åasopis. The contrasting examples of Amela and Dijana show that it is very difficult to draw general conclusions about the unifying effect of the church. He did not want to tell his name and then they asked for his identification card. In many ways this process of integration seems to be happening in the Evangelical Church. As far as I know. Integration of ethnic groups is one of the most important. Reconciliation in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. This example shows how hard it is to avoid the conflict in Mostar. but also difficult objectives of most peace building organisations. Amir was of course not able to defend himself against a whole group of men. a group of Bosnian Croats had come up to him and had asked him for his name. despite his anger. is a small part of the post-war reconciliation process in the whole of Mostar and of BiH. Amir is an 18 year old Bosnian Muslim. Several weeks after this event Amir was still scared to go to West Mostar.

Outside of church activities the radical change of people’s lives appears often far more gradual. In fact reconciliation does not play an active role in the church. The division of Mostar has a lot of impact on people.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 175 Bosnian Croats can get in contact with each other. This does of course not mean that they always will. People are expected to loose part of their ethnic identity in the process of becoming part of the Evangelical Church. outside of church matters this integration appears to be less strong. but it does influence behaviour. So although in church people from different ethnic groups seem very much integrated. This has an effect on people’s ideas about ethnicity and about matters concerning reconciliation. Conclusion Shortly after the celebration of erection of the statue of Bruce Lee in Mostar. their lives and their social networks. However outside of church activities ethnicity often continues to play an important role in the life of evangelical Christians in Mostar. In many ways the . This is mostly also a gradual process. In the Evangelical Church people are called to forgive each other. In the Evangelical Church this is already the case for several years. although it is not one of it’s objectives. the statue that was to symbolize unity was destroyed by vandals. People change their moral standards and their ideas about forgiveness in the process of becoming an evangelical Christian. What is left now is the empty pedestal. Their new identity is neither Muslim nor Croat. In church people are expected to start a new life with Jesus irrespective of their ethnic background. Therefore ethnicity is not to have an important role during church activities. This is also the case for church people. The more a person becomes part of the Evangelical Church the more his or her social environment changes. Over time this has an effect on people’s lives. but evangelical. At the same time there is also a change in convictions. The primary objective of the church is to spread their message of Jesus Christ and most of it’s activities are focussed on this.

Unintended Reconciliation The unstable condition of a divided post-war city like Mostar creates a need for close-knit communities. When people join the church. this is a striking phenomenon. N° 9 empty pedestal is a symbol in itself. Belonging to a group offers human security in the precarious circumstances of Mostar. I have tried to write about one of the small sections of society in which there is some reason for hope. But this is only a very small community and there are reservations to be made about the way in which reconciliation is established in the Evangelical Church. Rebuilding Mostar is a slow and laborious project. In this final paragraph I will draw some conclusions. In this article I have discussed the role of reconciliation in the Evangelical Church in Mostar. a trans-national network to belong to and material aid. Almost none of the people that I studied during my fieldwork fit into the main categories in Mostar. When a person becomes part of the Evangelical . Ethnic differences do not play an important role in the church.176 Teoloãki åasopis. People who neither adhere to the catholic nor to the Islamic faith are in a comparable marginalised position. The result is that the Evangelical Church in Mostar consists of people from various ethnic backgrounds. It is the only religious group in Mostar that is ethnically mixed. In the Evangelical Church in Mostar some cautious steps towards reconciliation are being made. For those people church offers a local community. This means that they are not part of one of the main religious groups and it is religion that for most people defines their ethnic identity. the evangelical community defines their new identity. The main reason for this is that they all belong to the Evangelical Church in some way or another. Some pessimists would say that reconciliation is not possible at all. One is tempted to become pessimistic when one is confronted with present-day Mostar. Being part of the evangelical community is therefore of crucial importance for them. In a town where the division between ethnic groups determines nearly everything. In fact ethnicity in general is a subject that seems to be avoided in church. It is a monument for all the fruitless efforts to unify Mostar.

However. but in order to worship their God. First of all they find a strong community. People’s social life is often strongly influenced by one’s ethnic background. Many of these efforts are fruitless. Many of the people . The church does not have any strategies to reconcile people from different ethnic groups.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 177 Church he is expected to replace some of his ethnic identity by an evangelical Christian identity. In this way prejudices can be overcome and people can start building relationships with people from other groups. yet in a more unplanned way. A Bosnian Muslim can live his whole life in East Mostar and a Bosnian Croat has no need to go to East Mostar.The first objective of the church is to reach people with its message about Jesus. outside of church activities ethnicity does play a role in the life of evangelical Christians. In Mostar much effort is put into creating places where Muslims and Croats can meet. The people who come to church have common interests in going to church. Reconciliation is not one of the main objectives of the Evangelical Church. This makes integration a very difficult objective. Reconciliation is a process that needs a lot of time. They benefit from coming to church in various ways. The intended role of reconciliation might be minimal but in the Evangelical Church reconciliation between people does take place. Building bridges across the gap between Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats does not happen overnight. The conflict in Mostar has created two groups that have no urgent need to interact. This ethnic mix is possible because issues of ethnicity are intentionally avoided. A safe environment is created for people from all different ethnic groups by largely avoiding issues concerning ethnicity. Reconciliation is too much a political issue and the church does not want to be involved in political matters. People from different ethnic background come together. not with the objective of overcoming the division that is so present in Mostar. By joining the Evangelical Church one becomes a citizen of a heavenly kingdom. One of the reasons for this is that it is not easy to find matters of common interest. However. would be a premature conclusion that the reconciliation process does not play any role in the Evangelical Church in Mostar.

This integration creates good ground for reconciliation. Being part of such a community gives otherwise marginalised people a strong sense of belonging. the church is part of a trans-national network. material aid or a change of convictions and these people are present in every ethnic group in Mostar. people’s convictions change. This explains the ethnic diversity in church. Thirdly. It is especially attractive for those people who are in need of a strong community. Evangelical Christianity gives people very clear goals in life and it gives people hope for a better future. Often people return to their own ethnic groups outside of church matters. When a person joins a religious group this has an effect on his personal system of meaning making. Many of them do not fit automatically in one of the main groups in Mostar. The presence of foreign aid workers in church is something church people often benefit from in a direct way. These benefits attract people from all different ethnic background. So far the effect of the church on the rest of Mostar is relatively small. I do not think that is the case. N° 9 who come to church would otherwise be marginalised. Being part of a network offers people very practical opportunities.178 Teoloãki åasopis. People are often unaware of the social conditions that have an impact on the choices they make. People start to build relationships with people from different ethnic backgrounds. From this perspective it may seem like people join the church in a very calculating way. Many of the people in church come from a poor and powerless background. However . The integration of ethnic groups in the church is an unintended spin-off effect of the church. Maybe this will slowly change in the future when stronger relationships are being built among church people. Secondly people benefit in material ways from being part of the church. Church provides a local community and furthermore. Maybe reconciliation should become an intentional objective for the church. However this is still a slow process and the integration does not stretch far beyond church activities. in the process of becoming part of a church. By becoming part of the church they acquire a place in a strong network. I defined religion as part of the total framework of systems of meaning making.

Nationalist Partition and International Intervention London: Hurst and Company.L. In: Meyer. Berger. 41-56. M. 1994 Towards an Anthropology of European Communities. 1995 Medjugorje: Religion Politics.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 179 in some ways it could serve as a model for many organisations who try to reconcile people in Mostar. 1967 The Sacred Canopy: Elements of a Sociological Theory of Religion New York: Doubleday. pp. P. .) 1994. Bax. J. Ethnic. Bibliography Appadurai. and Religious Identities London: Routledge.). 1999 The Multicultural Riddle. G. Globalization and Identity Oxford: Blackwell. and Violence in Rural Bosnia Amsterdam: VU Uitgeverij. P. Berger. Boissevain. Oxford: Berg. A. and Luckmann. The Anthropology of Europe. 2002 Bosnia after Dayton. (eds. Bose. 1966 The social Construction of Reality New York: Anchor Books. pp. S. Th. B. V.L. and Geschiere P. 305-324. A. Baumann. In: Goddard. Rethinking National. 1999 Certainty: Ethnic Violence in the Era of Globalization. (ed.

) 2002 A Reader in the Anthropology of Religion Malden/Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. URL:http://reason. H. 2006 Mostar’s little dragon. Kelly. . (ed. M. Zaitchik. April 2006. N° 9 Bringa. R. Princeton: Princeton University Press.com/archives/2006/04/01/mostars-littledragon. (1995). A. Lifton.180 Teoloãki åasopis. Manuel A. and Sheppard. 1995 Miracle in Mostar Oxford: Lion Publishing. T. Lambek. D. T. Eriksen. 1995 Being Muslim the Bosnian way. Faking Democracy after Dayton London: Pluto Press. York: Basic Books. Vásquez. 1995 The protean self: human resilience in an age of fragmentation. and Marie Friedmann Marquardt 2003 Globalizing the Sacred. 2000 Bosnia. L. J. G. Religion across the Americas London: Rutgers University Press. Chandler. 2002 Ethnicity and Nationalism London: Pluto Press. Identity and Community in a Central Bosnian Village.

Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 181 .

182 Teoloãki åasopis. N° 9 PREGLEDNI RADOVI .

. Yelchaninov’s designation).96"20" Primljeno: 25.2010 Pregledni Ålanak An Orthodox World View For Life In The 21 . that God Almighty is “Maker of heaven and earth. society. incomparable. “There are no commonplace.03. This is not so only because we are finite: it is because he is transcendent. And within it.”1 Fr. Let us now consider briefly your Orthodox “Christian outlook” (to borrow Fr. All else came into being only by his creative activity. with the collapse of Communist restrictions and the opportunity to live as God’s faithful in freedom.. Even our recognition of our limitations in speaking of him can only be . thought. Yelchaninov recognized that Orthodoxy’s worldview includes the whole of creation. but nothing in that creation is on a continuum with him: God is not the “ultimate” member in a chain of being.03. non-religious matters: The ‘Christian outlook’ is one whole. all matters are seen in their spiritual dimensions and significance. One of the renowned Russian Orthodox leaders of the past recognized this Orthodox potential: Father Alexander Yelchaninov said. Orthodoxy confesses. or anything else. In himself. you Orthodox—here in Serbia and in other Eastern European countries—have a new opportunity to influence your society with your rich heritage.C e n t u r y In this 21st century.. and all vocations.” God made but is utterly different from his creation. education. God is and forever will remain beyond us— incomprehensible. Jim Payton 183 UDK 281. and of all things visible and invisible.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet Dr. in the words of the Nicene Creed. and ineffable.2010 Prihvañeno: 30.

Humanity was to serve as priests. in its future development. God is nearer to his creation than we can grasp. offering all the wonders of creation. but only in him.5 The cosmos only had meaning. The one who. while human beings were greatly privileged to be thus the only microcosm of all the rest of creation. they were positioned at the intersection of everything else in creation and called to work with that creation.” as God pronounced it at the end of his creative work.6 As both St. and God had built into all creation the potential with which it should develop. God is beyond even our awareness that he is beyond us. In stark contrast to ancient Greek philosophy’s endorsement of the eternally static and unchanging as the ultimate good. as St. “the visible and the invisible”. Gregory Palamas has reminded us. life. Gregory of Nyssa and St.184 Teoloãki åasopis. N° 9 couched in thoughts and terms derived from our created human intellectual capacities.3 While what he created was utterly different from the Creator. This was true for all of creation. who enjoyed a special place in the creation. Orthodoxy—fol- . It was “very good. and has its being. it was true also for humanity. Composed of body and soul. in his essence. Orthodoxy stresses that God made the creation dynamic.7 As God’s image-bearers. in philosophical terminology. in his energies.9 since it was complete and harmonious. humans were to manifest the greatness of God’s creation by bringing to light and fruition all that God had prepared the creation to become. the material and the immaterial. John of Damascus taught. absolutely immanent. under the leadership of his human vice-regents. By using the gifts God had given them as his image-bearers. and future in the God who made and sustained it.”4 God did not make the creation self-sustaining: it could have no life in itself. God made human beings as the only creatures who would share equally in both the realms of creation—in the words of the Nicene Creed.8 to bring out the fullness of its potential to the glory of God. moves. But it still had to develop. to God’s praise. is utterly transcendent is. human beings were placed in the Garden of Eden. that Creator nevertheless was the one in whom the entire creation “lives. they were even more greatly privileged to bear the image of God. human beings participated in both realms.2 And yet.

a champion who would overcome evil. they fell into death. but the divine one. society. our first parents—and their descendants.15 Eventually. and the environment with little thought for its development and more for our advantage (in power.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 185 lowing the teaching of St. all to the glory of the Creator. The creation should develop over time. they looked to the creation rather than to the Creator for what they needed. rather than drawing near to the One for whose fellowship we were created but whose eternal existence is beyond our comprehension. in which everything is always in process of change and development.14 The garden has become a desert.16 God’s Son.11 But our first parents. and stewardly manner with everything else in creation. depending thus on what had no life in itself. bringing out all its latent possibilities. This task would not be completed in only a few days or years: the God who had made all things also created time. we have misused the rest of creation for our own benefit—in government. down through history—were to work in a gentle. becoming more deeply committed to their God and increasingly aware of his greatness and his love toward his creation. Adam and Eve. sought a short-cut to that likeness: heeding the suggestion of the tempter. Maximos Confessor10—urges that the “ultimate good” for creation is its God-given dynamism. Basil the Great and St. we have been attracted by what serves our fleeting temporal existence. In so doing. and love: created in the divine image. and humanity was to lead it progressively in that development. service. Seeking the most of our brief life.12 In so doing. intending it to unfold into the sweep of subsequent history. Dependent on him—as was all of the rest of creation—humanity was to deepen its commitment to him in lives of joy. In dependence on and faithful communion with God. as one of their descendants. they tried to become like God by eating the forbidden fruit. he fulfilled that promise and sent not only a human son. human beings would themselves develop. and took their descendants with them. God promised our fallen first parents that he would send. the second person of the Trinity. or possessions). influence. they were to acquire the divine likeness as they served and communed with God. and we have filled our mouths with sand. . loving.13 Through subsequent human history.

I claim no originality for it: I am only trying to think with . Perhaps you who are Orthodox already recognize all I will say. to live up to humanity’s original calling—every day. God—who alone has life in himself—broke the stranglehold of death on humanity. in taking upon himself the death Adam had brought into the world. The resurrected Christ summons us to enter into the fullness of our humanity in this life. its liturgy. in his resurrection.18 All this Orthodoxy celebrates in the gathering of the church. in order to break its power over others. in all they do. But. if so. but I trust that what we have considered is sufficient to indicate its broad contours. Christ yielded to what had no power over him. Let me now briefly suggest three implications of this worldview for life in the 21st century. John Chrysostom long ago spoke about this as “the liturgy after the liturgy. as the Orthodox liturgist Fr.19 St. In uniting humanity and deity.”17 The incarnation was not only a rescue operation for fallen human beings. If any of this strikes you as new. on this earth.186 Teoloãki åasopis. in this life and on this earth. We are called anew to the task given our first parents: we are to give ourselves freely and fully to work in and develop all of creation—a creation now redeemed in Jesus Christ20—to God’s glory. in coming as fully human.” In Jesus Christ human beings are freed and enabled. Orthodox worship rightly understood impels the faithful to vigorous Christian action in the world. I can only beg your indulgence. The opportunities of serving him in this life are as unlimited as the vastness of creation and its manifold potential. the divine Son became all that the first man was called to be—faithful to God and devoted to him through all his life. since in the incarnation God established a bridge between himself as Creator and his creation. death. he overcame humanity’s enemies—sin. since I have not found these matters discussed anywhere in the Orthodox literature available to me. N° 9 took humanity unto himself in the incarnation. Alexander Schmemann urges. and the Eucharist. though: it offered hope for all of creation. Much more could be said in sketching out the riches of an Orthodox worldview. and “the Word became flesh. and the devil—to free us to live unto God in the present life.

There is nothing—no realm of scholarship. an inescapable responsibility in faithfully learning. depends on him—and. We examine what we now know of that creation and seek ways to develop both our knowledge and that creation further. In the first place. the sciences. technology. Even so. sport. art. politics. government. an Orthodox approach to contemporary life would embrace the wide diversity of God’s manifold creation. no section of life. God’s creation and his calling on our lives encourage us to engage in such exploration. an Orthodox approach to contemporary life would encourage all the faithful to develop their potential for God’s service as his image-bearers and vice-regents. or whatever—are the exploration and elucidation of what God placed within the creation. Thirdly. Whatever humankind may manage to develop. and he calls his image-bearers to develop that creation to its full potential. He has set us free to resume our human task of developing culture. consequently. all that can be studied comes from God’s creative activity. we must honor both God’s essence and his energies. As we live. and in all places. in every day. economics. medicine. we will be working with the still rich potential God built into the “all things visible and invisible” which he created. he remains ever transcendent. In all our labors and learning. consequently. science. redeemed and restored in Christ. as we learn (whether in school or by experience). needs to be studied and taught as his. Whatever advances we or others may achieve in any field of endeavor—in culture. music.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 187 you through the implications of your worldview for life in the present day. all to God’s glory. Secondly. His dynamic creation has built into it all the possibilities that God intends for it. we are always encountering the divine energies: keeping him in mind is. no function of interpersonal society—which is secular. from an Orthodox perspective. Responsible life before God implies not only passing on what has already been learned. but engaging in the work of ongoing explorations and reflections which will enhance what we may learn about the cosmos. business. literature. All comes from him. The privilege of serving the resurrected Christ is not restricted to priests and monks: human beings can serve him in all legitimate occupations. .

as political scientists or factory workers. . taking their place in our human task of unfolding the riches of that creation to the praise of its Creator. as leaders in society or as followers. as medical researchers or politicians. I pray this will transpire among the Orthodox faithful here in Serbia in the 21st century. as chemists or homemakers. N° 9 and everything else out of what God had prepared his magnificent creation to become. Thus. Human beings now can honor Christ the Creator and Redeemer by becoming fully all he has gifted them to be—as historians or electricians. from an Orthodox perspective. An Orthodox worldview has the potential to invigorate and stimulate the faithful today to become all God has made them to be. we can honor Christ in all areas of life.188 Teoloãki åasopis. Thank you.

. Acts 17:28. 11-14. as cited in George P. The Orthodox Faith 2:12.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 189 NOTES 1. the treatment in John Meyendorff. A Study of Gregory Palamas. 7. John of Damascus (The Orthodox Faith 2:12) urged this. New York: St. . on the basis of Genesis 1:26-27. Gregory of Nyssa (De Opificio Hominis. and St.19. trans. Maximos Confessor all made wide use of it. 1988). St. 6. Oratio 38: 11. 206-207. Maximos Confessor.8. Cf the declaration of St. 2. during the course of the Hesychast controversy. 1974). John the Theologian: “All things came into being through him [the Logos]. Gregory Palamas had occasion to emphasize it. 16) and St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press. Gregory Palamas. This understanding of humanity is presented by St. 3. 2:3. see also the somewhat broader treatment in his Byzantine Theology: Historical Trends and Doctrinal Themes (New York: Fordham University Press. Basil the Great. 256. De variis difficilibus locis. cf. 1:3. Fr. George Lawrence (Crestwood. The Triads. and St. St. John of Damascus. 2d ed. St. In him was life (John l:3-4a). and without him not one thing came into being that has come into being. 1974). St. 4. Alexander Yelchaninov. Fedotov. Gregory of Nyssa. St. The essence/energies distinction was common among the ancient Greek fathers: St. and Oratio 45:7. A Treasury of Russian Spirituality (Fadux: Btichervertriebsansalt. 5. Gregory the Theologian.

the discussion in John Meyendorff. Anastasius of Sinai said. 2 above). 12. ‘Be fruitful and multiply. 10. Maximos Confessor agrees with these senti- . ‘Let us make humankind in our image. who was with her. 9. and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea. in the image of God he created them. but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat. Ch. God blessed them and God said to them. Cyril of Jerusalem. “Then God said. 43). cf. and he ate" (Genesis 2:16-17. “God saw everything that he had made. According to St... and fill the earth and subdue it. and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth. “Then God said. “We receive mortality from him [Adam]” (Questions and Answers. 13. but likeness was understood to be the goal toward which human beings were to develop. male and female he created them. among the Greek fathers. ‘Let us make humankind in our image.. and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth’” (Genesis 1:26-28). Homily 5. and indeed. St. Basil the Great taught this in his Hexaemeron. and she also gave some to her husband. and over all the wild animals of the earth.. “The first man brought in universal death” (Catechesis 13:2). according to our likeness’” (Genesis 1:26). according to our likeness. ‘You may freely eat of every tree of the garden. She took of its fruit and ate. St. “And the Lord God commanded the man. in the same vein. Byzantine Theology (as in n. image was understood as given in creation. for in the day that you eat of it you shall die’”. and over the birds of the air. “But the serpent said to the woman. N° 9 8. 3:4-6). 132-134. Maximos Confessor argued it in Adversus Thallassium.’ So God created humankind in his image. and over the cattle.190 Teoloãki åasopis. 11. it was very good” (Genesis 1:31).. St. ‘You will not die: for God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened and you will be like God’”.. 60.

Irenaeus. John 1:14. 1973).. Paul wrote that “When the fullness of time had come. New York: St. specifically citing St. his argument at 21.g. Gregory the Theologian. Gregory Palamas (144-145). St. 96-107. 16. he repeatedly urges that Orthodox worship should drive the faithful out into the world to engage in service (e. and you will strike his heel” (Genesis 3:15). John Chrysostom. and between your offspring and hers. 113. cf. in this work. John Meyendorff summarizes the consensus of the ancient Greek fathers and subsequent Byzantine Orthodox leaders on these points. 17. born of a woman” (Galatians 4:4). Vladimir’s Seminary Press. and St. “I will put enmity between you [the serpent]and the woman. and virtually all the ancient Greek fathers on the accomplishment of redemption by the incarnate Son of God. Maximos Confessor. New Jersey: St. Cyril of Alexandria. In his Byzantine Theology (as in n. God declared. his Byzantium and the Rise of Russia: A Study of Byzantino-Russian Relations in the Fourteenth Century (Crestwood. God sent his Son.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 191 ments (cf. In response to what had transpired. 100. 7 above). rightly understood. As well. 15. 19. 134). Theophylact of Ohrid. would lead to neglect of contemporary issues and problems: cf. St. Theodoret of Cyprus. 1989). The above summarizes the views of St. he will strike your head. St. 14. 18. St. Fr. Theodore of Mopsuestia. 123. as do virtually all the Greek fathers. Schmemann frequently deals with worldview issues as he treats Orthodox worship and sacraments in his For the Life of the World: Sacraments and Orthodoxy (Crestwood. John Meyendorff has argued that nothing in Orthodoxy. Vladimir’s Seminary Press. . his Quaestiones ad Thalassium).

“Redemption is a wondrous reality.192 Teoloãki åasopis. N° 9 In his Orthodox Theology: An Introduction (Crestwood. . which extends across the entire cosmos” (114). Lossky cites the statement by St. in confirmation of this. “A few drops of blood make the universe whole again” (patristic source not given). Vladimir’s Seminary Press. 1978). New Jersey: St. Vladimir Lossky urges. Gregory the Theologian.

the introductory sentence of the Second Missionary Journey.to interpret the text (with respect to the selected prominent commentaries) and to understand areas and principles of its implications.that followed the Acts 14:28. This is obvious. Acts 15:35 is the typical summary statement .what I would entitled .the Jerusalem Council event: Acts 15:1-35. . by which Luke has ended his report of the First Missionary Journey.by which Luke has wrapped it up the positive outcome of the decision of the Jerusalem Council that is followed by Acts 15:36.in the light of both its immediate and broad biblical context and its multifaceted (historical. geographical.08 Twelve Steps In The Exegesis Of The Acts 15:22-29 The exegetical method utilized in this study is the “Twelve Steps in the Exegesis of a Paragraph. 1 1. The Acts 15:22-29 passage immediately follows the concluding speech of James (15:13-21).which. since Acts 15:1 is a typical introductory sentence . cultural. 10. theological.” recommended by Charles Van Engen. By the linking word 1 See Van Engen 1998. Definition of the Passage The Acts 15:22-29 passage is the integral part of . ecclesiological and missiological) background . Likewise. in this case. The purpose of the exegesis of Acts 15:22-29 is to listen the text itself . the typical summary statement.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet Dimitrije Popadiñ 193 UDK 22. is opening up a new topic (controversial question related to circumcision that ruined Jewish/Gentile Christian relationship) .

the writer is “leaving” the Jerusalem Council . which is. 3. and in terms of the grater potential to geographically spread away from the center (Jerusalem). again. as the geographical place (verse 30 follows the events in Antioch) and as the event (the meeting of the apostles and the church) by citing the letter-conclusion of the Council. which could be seen as the preparation for the Second Coming of Christ). Within the gospel of Luke. which is the preparation for His ascension. Acts 15:22-29 is the sequence of the Acts 15:1-35. but it is a passage with its own identity: it carries the contents of the conclusion of the Jerusalem Council. the preparation for His dead and resurrection. the prologue is the preparation for the teaching and the ministry of Jesus. could be considered as a preparation for Acts (and the Acts as the preparation for the mission of the Church. the prologue is the preparation for the coming of the Spirit.since it is part of Luke’s one -though two volumes . Acts 15:1-35) as the preparation for the new level of the cross-cultural mission. Gospel of Luke. N° 9 “Then” (22) the writer begin to presents the corporate decision of the Council and the action taken by it (“chose… wrote a letter and sent…” 22. 23) and by the other “border-passage-verse. as a whole.194 Teoloãki åasopis. 2.both.work. Accordingly. the Acts 15: is the preparation for the new level of the cross cultural mission both in terms of the more explicit definition of the content of the message (the gospel is “free” from “burdens” of the Jewish culture). Thus. Relationship between Acts 15:22-29 and the Luke/Acts Acts 15:22-29 passage has to be considered in its relationship with Luke/Acts . Textual Variation The most significant textual variation of the Acts 15:22-29 passage has to do with the phrase: kai tou pniktou (“and what is stran- .versus Acts alone . Within the Acts.” (29). which is the preparation for mission. I can recognize this passage (with its immediate context. In this perspective.

which has been omitted in Western text of the Codex Bezae (D) and the Harclean Syriac (apparatus).stands in contrast with the Egyptian or Alexandrian text found in the Codex Vaticanus (B). Thus. the controversial demand for the circumcision lied upon the Gentles. 2 4. he (as well as James in that regard) has considered being a “yoke” (10). blood. 191. Even though the Jerusalem Council has made clear that the circumcision is not required for salvation (and Paul’s writing emphases the primacy of the circumcision of the hearth). particularly 17:10. a Jew). Robert Tannehill explains that the reason for such. things sacrificed to idols. This three-prohibitions ( 1. things strangled. 3. and its four -prohibitions (1.understood by the Western authorities as ethical in nature . fornication) Apostolic Decree that is understood by its authorities as a ceremonial in nature.’” This concern is build in the Jerusalem Decree (proposed by James. fornication) Apostolic Decree . and 4. and Tertullian in the early third century). they “might then have to choose withdrawal into isolation or ‘apostasy from Moses. for example. apparently contradictory act. (also confirmed by Irenaeus in the second. However. is Paul’s compassion for the concern of the Jewish Christians that “as Gentiles become the majority within the church”. we see Paul affirming Timothy’s circumcision. 2. things sacrificed to idols. . a special warning regarding the restriction of eating any manner of blood have needed to be enclosed with the final decision of the Jerusalem Council. 11. Tannehill 1998. most probably because of the strict language of the Leviticus 17 and 18. blood and 3. Relationship between Acts 15:22-29 and the Related Scriptures Simon Peter has learned a significant lessons (Lk 15:11-32 and Acts 10:1-48) which have undermined his ethnocentrism and help him to understand the non-legalistic nature of God’s message of salvation. since it takes into the consideration Jewish feelings about the outward behavior of the 3 2 3 See Smith 1919.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 195 gled”). 2.

. Geographical and Historical Setting The Jerusalem Council took place in the Church in Jerusalem. versus 12 and 22). and the whole congregation was present.” 4 5 7. (Given place. are not under the submission to the Jewish law . The Major Theme of Acts 15:22-29 The Church in Jerusalem has made an authoritative decision that the Gentiles. 255.196 Teoloãki åasopis. the Gospel is free from the Jewish cultural features and. 4 5 Bruce 1983. by which Luke is wrapping up the decision of the Council. by accepting the Gospel of Grace. The time of the Jerusalem Council falls in between the First and the Second Missionary Journeys. and thus it is determined by them.especially to the rite of circumcision . Literal Features of the Acts 15:22-29 The words. (Paul and Barnabas arrived in Jerusalem.) 6. and it is made by the “original” church established by Christ. where His apostles are the ministers and from where the gospel was spread all over.but they should only “abstain from sacrifices offered to idols and from blood and from animals strangled and from fornication:” (verse 29). N° 9 growing community of Gentles. 315. I will not discuss this issue. Furthermore. I am impressed by the careful construction of the letter. regarding which “some critics claim that it is a literary composition by Luke himself. Marshall 1983. “it seemed good to the Holy Spirit. wherever the Church have had its regular meetings.” and there is no parallel for such a phrase. In short. 5. which are now consisting the Church. thus. apostles and elders assembled for the meeting. verse 7. “emphasize the church’s role as the vehicle of the Spirit. you don’t have to circumsize. The decision is an authoritative one since it is inspired by the Holy Spirit. and to us” (verse 28). verse 4.

26) [and their opinion]. • In that. and the recipients. in that discloses organization of the early Church in terms of the role of the apostles.g. in that reveals the direct involvement of the Holy Spirit in the Church’s leadership and the decision making in general and. together with the Paul and Barnabas (verse 22). Ecclesiological. in particular. ecclesiological and missiological contribution of the passage are obvious. Missiological contribution of this passage is that clarifies the church’s understanding of the cross-cultural characteristic of the Gospel (because it is supra-cul- . by a council. Judah and Silas (27). • We are sending you our elders. The People Involved in Acts 15:22-29 All of the people mentioned in this passage are listed in the 22 and the 23 verse. Pneumatological. to confirmed that. blood and fornication (29). nd rd 10. The “Outline” of the Theme of Acts 15:22-29 I see the “outline” of the support of the main theme of Acts 15:22-29 as following: • The Gospel is free from the Jewish cultural features • The Jews that “upset your souls” (24) were not our representatives. 9. “to the brethren of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia. The Main Theological Concept of Acts 15:22-29 The pneumatological. we are in agreement with the Holy Spirit (28). apostles. elders and the congregation and the way of solving the church’s controversies e. elders . “who were leaders among the brethren” . • The only exceptions has to do with the idols.and the whole [Jerusalem] church. • We are confirming Paul and Barnabas (25. one which relates to the expansion of the Christian faith cross-culturally.including Judah (who is called Barsabas) and Silas.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 197 8.” (verse 23). There are two categories of the people: the senders of the letter.

If authentic . Conclusions in the Light of the Prominent Commentaries Verse 22. an organization that uses the means and methods of human secular societies. 12. it will be a yoke that troubles peoples’ souls more then it helps. the church would lose its God-given identity of being people of God. Gathered for the sake of Christ. since there was no authorization. Acts 15:22-29 has theological. The church in Jerusalem was well-organized. “The decision of the Council is put down in writing. Holy Spirit lead and inspired .” 6 7 6 7 Kurnizgen 1966. 253. the nature of the church would determine the nature of its mission. The Church is a properly ordered community.” Verse 24. Furthermore. ecclesiological and missiological implications. They acted decisively and they made a specific decisions regarding both what they decided about the controversy and how they would convey their decision. with an open-minded discussion of all participants. Harrison 1986. task-oriented and delegating church. N° 9 tural in nature) and enables it to carry out the Great Commission with authenticity. Implications Accordingly. 11.e. to know how to act when faced with the controversy. a church would create a platform for a fulfillment of God’s will. . 34. and it will consequently become a humane institution.g. Verse 23. In its letter.198 Teoloãki åasopis. submitted to the guidance of the Holy Spirit. This is important. If institutionalized. Without an active participation (or. This passage is a lighthouse to a church at any time and any place.it will be a blessing toward salvation to the recipients of the Gospel. better: leadership) of the Holy Spirit. the Council “carefully dissociated the Jerusalem church from those of their number who had made the demand contained in 15:1.

Harisson. They would not only deliver the letter. Krodel 1986. while the Holy Spirit functions as the chief authority to which the church and its leaders give their agreement.” 8 9 10 REFERENCES CITED Bruce. 288. 1986 Acts: Augsburg Commentary on the New Testament. 335.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 199 Verse 25 . 20). Polhill 1992. 1983 Commentary on the Book of the Acts. Krodel. Gerhard A. New York: Herder and Herder. Grand Rapids: William B. The leaders (apostles and elders) and the assembly (whole Jerusalem church) “are included in the pronoun us. 8 9 10 Stott 1990. F. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House. Grand Rapids: Academie Books Zondervan Publishing House. Kurnizgen.Eerdmans Publishing Company. 1986 Interpreting Acts: The Expanding Church. The Council “made it abundantly clear that the men they had now agreed to choose…and send… did have their full approval and support. but also confirm by word of mouth what it contained.27.” “Verse 29 lists the four provisions of the apostolic decree just as originally proposed by James (v. Vol. Everett F. 251.” Verse 28. . Josef 1966 The Acts of the Apostles. 1.

Mineapolis: Fortress Press. Charles 1998 “The Holy Spirit and Mission in Luke/Acts. N° 9 Marshall. Fuller Theological Seminary. Paul. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press. Tannehill. Smith. Stott. England: Inter-Varsity Press and Grand Rapids: William B. Howard 1983 The Acts of the Apostles: An Introduction and Commentary. John R. Eerdmans Publishing Company. Polhill. Vol 2. Neshville: Broadman Press. Leicester. David 1919 The Life and Letters of St. New York: Doran. Robert 1998 The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts A Literary Interpretation. 1990 The Spirit the Church and the World: The Message of Acts. Van Engen. W. . John B. I.” MT 523 Course Description and Syllabus.200 Teoloãki åasopis. 1992 The New American Commentary: Acts.

. i identifikovanje i razumevanje odreœenih oblasti i principa primene ovoga teksta.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 201 Rezime U ovom ålanku autor predstavlja dvanaest koraka procesa egzegeze svetopisamskog teksta opisa Jerusalimskog sabora (Dela 15:22-29). i to u svom uæem i ãirem biblijskom kontekstu i u svetlu njegove viãeslojne (istorijske. geografske. i to prema uputima profesora Åarlsa Van Engena. tumaåenje teksta s osvrtom na odabrane priznate komentare. kulturne. eklesioloãke i misioloãke) pozadine. Svrha egzegeze ovoga odlomka jeste „sluãanje“ samoga teksta. teoloãke.

202 STRUÅNI RAD .

zaãto dolazi do bolesti. ko je zgreãio. Zato su i postavili takvo pitanje.2010 Svetske religije. on.predavaå za predmete Primljeno: 22. teol.2010 Hriãñanska etika i duãebriæniãtvo Pregledni ålanak Protestantski Teoloãki Fakultet u Novom Sadu Pastor Hriãñanske Baptistiåke Crkve u Novom Sadu ( pilicnip@nspoint. Kada su u pitanju uzroci bolesti. U ovom radu bih hteo prvo da kaæem neãto o bolestima u svetlu starozavetnog otkrivenja.23:616 Asistent . Oni su smatrali da je u pitanju bio greh. danas. ili njegovi roditelji pa se slep rodio?” (Jovan 9:1-3). Meœutim. koji je bio slep od roœenja. patnja ili kazna snalazi. da li je moæda ta bolest samo rezultat ljudske nemarnosti za oåuvanjem sopstvenog zdravlja? Verujem da mnogi hriãñani.02.03. kada govorim o duhovnim aspektima bolesti æelim naglaãenije govoriti o postavci Isusa i njegovih . Isusovi uåenici su znatiæeljno postavili svom uåitelju jedno vaæno pitanje: “ravi. Prihvañeno: 01. a i mnogi drugi. Petar Piliñ UDK 234. ljudi se i danas pitaju zaãto ih takav bol.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 203 Dipl.net ) Duhovni aspekti bolesti Biblijska perspektiva Rezime Pre oko dve hiljade godina Isus je prolazio sa svojim uåenicima pored jednog slepca. Meœutim. æele odgovor na ovo pitanje kao i Hristovi uåenici u ono vreme. pitanja mogu biti postavljena na sledeñi naåin: da li je neko ljudsko biñe bolesno zbog posledice greha? Da li je to ljudsko biñe moæda bolesno zato ãto ga je Sotona hteo iskuãati kao Jova? Ili. Neki pokuãavaju da shvate smisao bolesti.

Da bismo imali ãto jasniju sliku o bolesti u svetlu starozavetnog otkrivenja potrebno je analizirati nekoliko starozavetnih tekstova koji govore o takvim dogaœajima. isceljenje. Bog se brinuo za zdravlje svog naroda ali narod je trebao da mu bude posluãan. pogotovo za pripadnike izabranog naroda. apostoli. greh. ponovo zdravi. i ako prigneã uho k zapovijestima njegovijem i uãåuvaã sve uredbe njegove. Uåitelj i Gospod. Bolesni ljudi su morali da se pokaju i da mole Boga za oproãtenje da bi ozdravili.su bili isceljeni. Zatim. zato ãto je On moj Spasitelj. N° 9 uåenika prema bolestima.dogaœaj koji govori o Boæijoj kazni za Avimeleka i njegovom pomilovanju. Bolest je u Starom zavetu bila Boæija kazna za neposluãnost. lekar tvoj”. jer sam ja Gospod. reãenje i uteha u pogledu ljudskih bolesti kada su u pitanju duhovni aspekti bolesti. Isus Hristos. Avimelek je poslao svoje sluge . bolest. U knjizi Izlazak u petnaestom poglavlju u dvadesetãestom stihu. na prvom mestu o bolestima. Pronaãao sam åetiri teksta koja ñu koristiti za ovu analizu. Bog je dao åoveku jedan uslov koji ñe mu sigurno obezbediti zdravlje. i uåiniã ãto je pravo u oåima njegovijem. æelim da vidim kako se Isus postavljao u takvim sluåajevima. Smatram da u Njegovim i njihovim postavkama leæi smisao. u svetlu novozavetnog otkrivenja. Avram je govorio za svoju æenu Saru da mu je sestra. ali takoœe i puãta bolest na åoveka (Pnz. Kljuåne reåi: Stari zavet. Åovek je u Boæijim rukama i niko i niãta ne moæe izbaviti åoveka iz njegovih ruku jer je Bog åovekov Stvoritelj. Saznavãi za Saru. Postanak 20 . U Starom zavetu. Zato. Bog je rekao svom narodu: “Ako dobro uzasluãaã glas Gospoda Boga svojega. i kako bi trebali i danas. Novi zavet. Pokajanje je bilo put ka ozdravljenju. 1. Bolesti u svetlu starozavetnog otkrivenja Bog je onaj koji daje zdravlje åoveku. nijedne bolesti koju sam pustio na Misir neñu pustiti na tebe. Neki od njih.204 Teoloãki åasopis. nakon ãto su se pokajali. 32:39). demoni. æelim da vidim i kako su se Njegovi uåenici postavljali u sliånim situacijama.

Bog je rekao Avimeleku u snu da je uåinio zlo jer je uzeo æenu koja ima muæa. ako izvrãi moæe da ozdravi i ostane æiv. kao kaznu za greh davao bolest koja je vodila u smrt. Trebao je da vrati Saru Avramu i da se Avram pomoli za njega jer je Avram prorok. i æivot njegove porodice.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 205 da mu je dovedu za æenu. videlo se da se njegov gnev spustio na Mariju jer je ona bila gubava. prvo trebao da se pokaje za uåinjeni greh/grehe. a zatim je Mariji i Aronu rekao da su uåinili greh gunœajuñi protiv Mojsija kao njegovog proroka sa kojim on razgovara lice u lice. Oni su smatrali da Gospod ne govori samo preko Mojsija.govori o Boæijoj kazni za Mariju koja je gunœala protiv Mojsija kao Boæijeg proroka. Avimelek je ispunio Boæiji uslov. Avram se pomolio da Bog isceli Avimeleka i ceo njegov dom. Gospoda Boga je ovo gunœanje naljutilo. Mojsije. i to se i dogodilo. Inaåe. Boæiji åovek. Meœutim. Marija i Aron su gunœali protiv Mojsija jer im se nije svidelo ãto je uzeo æenu Madijanku. U Starom zavetu je vaæilo pravilo: ko zgreãi biñe kaænjen. Arona i Mojsija da doœu u ãator od sastanka. a zatim da se za njega pomoli Boæiji åovek ili prorok. Dakle. Kada je Bog otiãao iz ãatora od sastanka. Videvãi Mariju. Zbog Avramovog kukaviåluka. bila je bela kao sneg. i da ñe zbog toga Avimelek poginuti. zato mu je Bog dao uslov. u starozavetno doba. Boæiji åovek. 2. vratio je Saru Avramu i joã mu je dao mnoge darove. neposluãnost. Meœutim. ko bude posluãan biñe blagosloven. Dakle iz ovog primera moæemo videti da je u starozavetno doba. Bog je. bolest je i u ovom sluåaju bila kazna za greh. Stari zavet nije baã poznat po milosti. Gospod je pozvao Mariju. u ovom primeru Bog se smilovao na Avimeleka i dao mu uslov od åijeg je ispunjenja zavisio njegov. pomolio se za Marijino isceljenje i Bog mu je rekao da ñe ona biti za sedam dana zdrava i da se onda moæe vratiti nazad u narod. koji. Aron se pokajao i zamolio Mojsija da moli Boga za Marijino isceljenje. Ono ãto je bilo potrebno da bi Marija bila isceljena je . Brojevi 12 . da bi åovek ozdravio. Avimelek je to uåinio iz neznanja.

U protivnom. Mojsije je napravio zmiju onakvu kakvu mu je Gospod zapovedio da napravi. bilo je bitno da se oni pokaju za svoj greh. i svako ko je verom pogledao u tu zmiju. bez milosti su umirali. Gospod je åuo tu molitvu. Meœutim. Narod Izraelski se spasao pogledom vere u zmiju koju je Mojsije napravio i podigao. Gospod je to åuo pa je spustio svoj gnev na one koji su gunœali tako da je veliki broj ljudi pomreo od ujeda zmija. Zato je Jezekija u suzama molio Gospoda da mu se smiluje i da mu da da poæivi joã nekoliko godina. Znaåi. a nisu se pokajali i prihvatili Boæije reãenje za ozdravljenje.govori o Jezekijinoj smrtnoj bolesti i isceljenju te bolesti jer je Bog odluåio da Jezekija poæivi joã petnaest godina.206 Teoloãki åasopis. i zato ãto im se hleb ogadio. smilovao se Jezekiji. za bolesnu osobu. bio je Bogu veran i celim srcem je åinio ono ãto je bilo Bogu ugodno. Mojsije se molio za to i Bog je sklonio zmije i rekao mu naåin na koji ñe ozdraviti oni koje su zmije ujele. u ovom sluåaju za Mariju. Isaija je rekao Jezekiji da uzme grudu suvih smokava i da stavi na mesto na kom je otok i da ñe tako ozdraviti. Jezekija je bio veoma poboæan. Izraelci su se bunili protiv Boga i Mojsija zbog toga ãto su ih izveli iz Misira. i preko proroka Isaije mu poruåio da ñe poæiveti joã petnaest godina. svi oni koje su ujedale zmije. Isus je govorio da ñe i on biti podignut kao i ova zmija i da ñe svako ko poveruje u Njega biti spaãen (Jovan 3:14). 3. pokajali su se ãto su gunœali i doãli su kod Mojsija moleñi ga da moli Gospoda da ukloni zmije od naroda.govori o tome kako se Bog smilovao na ljude koji su gunœali protiv njega i dao Mojsiju reãenje od bolesti. Brojevi 21:5-9 . a zatim da to kaæu Boæijem proroku. da bi se on pomolio za njih i njihovo ozdravljenje. . Isaija 38:1-5. Jezekija je to posluãao i ozdravio je. bio je ozdravljen. 21 . N° 9 pokajanje i molitva proroka. Kada se Jezekija smrtno razboleo doãao mu je prorok Isaija i preneo mu poruku od Gospoda da ñe umreti. 4. Inaåe. Boæijeg åoveka. Isus je sebe uporedio sa ovom zmijom koju je Mojsije napravio i podigao da bi je svi videli. Kada su ostali videli ãta se deãava.

da bolesti naãe nosi i nemoñi naãe uzme (Is. 53:4). kako je koristio svoj autoritet i svoju moñ kada je isceljivao bolesne. Sveto pismo nam indirektno govori da je najznaåajnije videti kako se Isus postavljao prema bolestima. bolesti u svetlu novozavetnog otkrivenja nam daju joã jasniju i bogatiju sliku o uzrocima i razlozima bolesti i naåinima isceljenja bolesnih od strane Isusa Hrista i njegovih uåenika. znaåajno je videti kako su se apostoli postavljali prema bolestima. Mislim da smo analizirajuñi ova åetiri primera dobili jasniju sliku o bolestima u svetlu starozavetnog otkrivenja. 8:46). ipak bismo mogli pretpostaviti da su u pitanju bili gresi koje je ranije poåinio jer u sedamnaestom stihu Jezekija kaæe da je Gospod “bacio za leœa svoja sve grijehe moje”. videti kako su koristili Isusov autoritet i njegovu moñ da bi iscelili bolesne. Meœutim. Uglavnom je bolest bila kazna za greh.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 207 Ovaj dogaœaj je Jezekija zapisao u svojoj knjizi (38:9-20). bili ozdravljani. To je i radio. Kada je isceljivao. . kako je isceljivao bolesne tj. ãta je radio. Isus i bolesti u evanœelju po Luki Za Isusa Hrista je najavljeno da ñe isceliti mnoge kada bude doãao na ovu zemlju (Is. U Luki 5:17 je zapisano da je Isus leåio silom Gospodnjom. On je imao veliku moñ i ljudi su se zaprepaãñivali jer je åinio pred njima åuda isceljenja i izgonio demone (Lk. Ali. Isusova sluæba je bila puna takvih dogaœaja. drugim reåima. Bog je i u Starom zavetu imao milosti prema greãnima pa je. 53). Isus je imao taj autoritet i narod je to primeñivao. ta je sila izlazila iz Njega (Lk. ukoliko su se bolesni pokajali i ukoliko se Boæiji åovek molio za njih. 4:36). Nadalje. Smatram da ñemo tada imati jasniju sliku o bolestima u svetlu novozavetnog otkrivenja. Bolesti u svetlu novozavetnog otkrivenja Novi zavet na mnogo mesta govori o bolestima i njihovim isceljenjima. Dakle. On je posedovao tu silu i nije imao potrebu da se poziva na neki autoritet. Iako nije jasno reåeno koji je bio uzrok Jezekijine bolesti. On je doãao da oslobodi suænje. Moguñe je da je i u ovom sluåaju greh bio uzrok bolesti. posledica greha.

1. Autoritativno se izraæavajuñi.208 Teoloãki åasopis. 4:38. U ovoj situaciji su mu naroåito trebali ljudi koji bi ga odneli do Isusa.1 Reåi nisu bile izgovorene ali je sam åin bio nema molba. Kod ovog bolesnika uzrok bolesti je na prvom mestu bio greh. 39 – isceljenje Petrove taãte. njegovi prijatelji su trebali imati veliku veru u Isusa da bi raskopali krov od kuñe i spustili bolesnika pred Isusa. On to nije namerno uradio da bi se prepirao sa farisejima. 25 – isceljenje uzetoga. a tri ñu detaljnije analizirati. imala je groznicu. Petrova taãta je ustala zdrava i posluæivala ih je. 23. veñ je to uradio da bi paralisani åovek mogao da bude isceljen. Isus je rekao ono ãto je moralo da se uradi. 5:18-20. a ne o bolesti. . Moris: 1983: str. 24. ali to ne implicira da je greh uzrok svaåije bolesti. Isus je video njihovu veru i ozdravio åoveka. Isus se nagnuo nad njom i zapretio groznici. Isus je doãao u Petrovu kuñu. odnosno da su svi bolesni kaænjeni jer su poåili mnogo greha. Poãto je bila velika guæva. sve ñu ih ukratko prokomentarisati. opraãtaju ti se gresi. Ovom bolesniku su bili potrebni ljudi koji bi ga nosili ako bi trebao negde da ode.2 Iako su tu bili prisutni fariseji. trebalo je prvo oprostiti grehe.3 Moæda neki smatraju da 1 2 3 Vidi: Galvin: 1999: str. Petrova taãta je bila bolesna. Manson smatra da “ono ãto je taj dogaœaj u prvom redu trebao istaknuti jeste upravo åinjenica da Isusov autoritet u podruåju vere poåinje opraãtanjem greha”. 989. Isusa je zadivila vera njegovih prijatelja. Vidi: Carson: 1994: str. Isus se nije osvrtao na njih iako je znao da su oni tu da bi ga uhvatili u pogreãci. Isus je rekao: åoveåe. jer je to bilo reãenje. 2. 115. N° 9 U nastavku ñu navesti trinaest neposrednih Isusovih izleåenja bolesnih. Isusove prve reåi u ovom dogaœaju govore o grehu.

Odeljak Lk. 8:43-48 – isceljenje krvotoåive æene.4 Luka se usredsreœuje na samo isceljenje. 6. Kapetan rimske vojske je. Mislim da je to moguñe ali to ne mora da bude pravilo (Vidi Lk. pozvao je åoveka sa bolesnom rukom da stane na sredinu sinagoge. poruåio da on nije dostojan da Isus uœe u njegovu kuñu niti da on sam doœe pred njega. 5. 8:43-48 nam govori o isceljenju krvotoåive æene. Zbog toga ãto je znao misli fariseja i knjiæevnika. Jovana. Ljudima ne preostaje niãta drugo nego da pogledom vere gledaju na Onog koji je Lekar nad lekarima. Nakon jednog Isusovog pitanja. Ova æena je iãla kod 4 Vidi: Moris: 1983: str. Ona je doæivljavala mnoge neugodnosti jer su je smatrali neåistom zbog krvarenja (Lev. na koje nije bilo odgovora. Meœu njima su bile Marija Magdalena. da se ona mnogo namuåila dok se leåila kod lekara jer je to za Luku koji je i sam bio lekar bilo sasvim normalno da je ta æena tako prolazila. Dok je Isus jedne subote uåio u sinagogi zapazio je åoveka sa suvom desnom rukom.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 209 greh obavezno donosi neku bolest. Isus je bio zadivljen kapetanovom verom. Ovaj tekst govori o Isusovim sledbenicama koje je Isus izleåio od zlih duhova i bolesti. 4. . 160. kao ãto to evanœelista Marko kaæe. 8:2-3 – Isus je isceljivao i nespomenute u Evanœeljima. 3. 15:25). Susana i mnoge druge koje ne spominju Evanœelja. ali mu je. pozvao Isusa da to uåini. 13:1-5). 6:6-10 – isceljenje åoveka sa suvom rukom. Kapetan je poruåio da je dovoljna samo jedn Isusova reå i njegov ñe sluga biti zdrav. Tako je i bilo. Nekada bolesnici idu kod lekara i potroãe svoje imanje da bi bili izleåeni ali ne vredi. verujuñi da Isus moæe isceliti njegovog slugu. na Isusa. 7:1-10 – isceljenje kapetanovog sluge. ujedno. Luka nam ovde ne kaæe. Ovo ne znaåi da ljudi ne trebaju iñi kod lekara. Isus je reåju iscelio suvu ruku tom åoveku rekavãi: “pruæi svoju ruku”.

vera tvoja spasla te je. Zato. idi s mirom”. Isus je isterao demona iz nemog åoveka i åovek je progovorio. zbog zakona (Lev. Ona je bila Avramova kñer ali je njena bolest bila zla. 9. Sotona ju 5 6 7 Vidi: Carson: 1994: str. stareãina sinagoge nije mogao da vidi dalje od propisane norme i da u ozdravljenju zgråene æene ugleda Isusovu samilost. posle svih neuspeha ona je doãla do Isusa. 9:38-42 – isceljenje mladiña koji ima padavicu. Isus je silazio sa gore preobraæenja i naiãao na åoveka koji ga je zamolio da mu isceli sina. Deåak je imao padavicu jer ga je neåisti duh bacao na zemlju. 11:14 – izgoni demona i nemi progovara. 15:27). 8. 13:10-13 – isceljena æena koja je 18 godina pogrbljena je moj treñi detaljniji primer koji koristim u ovoj analizi. Dakle. priãla mu je u veri æeleñi tajno da se dotakne Njega i bude isceljena. Isus je æeleo da ta æena da svedoåanstvo pred svima. U ovom stihu se govori o joã jednom primeru Isusove sile i autoriteta. Vidi: Galvin: 1999: str. Dok su deåaka dovodili Isusu demon je bacio deåaka na zemlju i poåeo da ga trza.210 Teoloãki åasopis. vera joj je pomogla i bila je isceljena. Vidi: Galvin: 1999: str.6 7. a bavljenje takvim poslom na ãabat je bilo zabranjeno. priñi Isusu otvoreno. isti sluåaj moæe biti sa nekima od nas. Ova æena koja nije mogla. Æeleo je da se ova æena predstavi i da joj da na znanje da njegova odeña nema nikakvo magiåno dejstvo.5 Naravno. 995. N° 9 lekara ali nije vredelo. . Nije hteo da to ostane samo izmeœu njih.7 Niãta ne upuñuje na pretpostavku da je ta æena verovala u Isusa. Isus je isterao neåistog duha i na taj naåin izleåio deåaka. veñ da je njena vera u Njega ta koja ju je iscelila. “kñeri. Ovaj dogaœaj je narod zadivio a zavidne posmatraåe odveo u drugi ekstrem. 35. 52. Religiozne voœe su smatrale da je isceljenje lekarski posao.

“Moæda Luka æeli reñi da je u tom trenutku ona veñ od tog duha (11) bila osloboœena (12). Isus je jedne subote bio gost u kuñi farisejskog stareãine. U ovih trinaest primera mogli smo videti Isusa i Njegovu postavku prema duhovnim aspektima bolesti. Isus se smilovao nad njim i reåju ga izleåio. 18:35-43 – isceljenje jerihonskog slepca.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 211 je svezao. Iscelio je slugino uvo bez da ga je sluga to zamolilo. Ova bolest je bila prouzrokovana demonom koji ju je dræao zgråenom. i dotaknuo njegovo uvo. 14:1-4 – isceljenje åoveka koji ima vodenu bolest. 13.9 10. Petar je napao prvosveãtenikovog slugu i odsekao mu je desno uvo. Mislim da su ovi primeri dovoljno pouåni da bismo ovo shvatili: Isus je Lekar nad 8 9 Vidi: Carson: 1994: str. U toj kuñi je bio åovek koji je patio od vodene bolesti. 51 – isceljenje uva prvosveãtenikovog sluge. . poloæio je svoje ruke na nju i ona se odmah ispravila. Kada su prvosveãtenikove sluge doãle po Isusa da bi ga priveli. Kada su ga doveli do Isusa. Na putu za Jerihon Isus je prolazio pored jednog slepca. Jedan od njih je video da je izleåen. 12. te da je Isus samo dovrãio isceljenje”. priãao mu. videvãi ãta se deãava. Isus uglavnom nije polagao ruke na bolesnike. slavio je Boga i vratio se da zahvali Isusu. 22:50. povikao iz sveg glasa da se Isus smiluje nad njim. slepac je zatraæio da Isus uåini da on progleda. uzroånika bolesti. Isus ga je izleåio dohvatom nakon neodgovorenog pitanja: “da li se sme subotom leåiti?” 11. Isus se smilovao na slugu. 1003.8 Isus je æenu proglasio isceljenom. Prilikom isterivanja demona. Isus im je dao reå da ñe biti oåiãñeni na putu do sveãtenika kojima su trebali da se pokaæu. Na putu izmeœu Samarije i Galileje. 17:12-14 – isceljenje deset gubavaca. åuvãi da Isus prolazi. Isusa je srelo deset gubavaca koji su izdaleka podigli glas molbe da se on smiluje na njih. Moris: 1983: str. 229. Slepac je. komentariãuñi da ga je spasla njegova vera.

Kada je prizvano Isusovo ime da isceli bolest. da se proslavi Otac u Sinu. Apostol Petar i Jovan glavne su liånosti ovog dogaœaja. Zato. Meœutim. Najverodostojnije i najjaåe dokaze o ovoj Isusovoj izjavi moæemo nañi u knjizi Dela apostolskih. jer ja idem k Ocu. Stoga. kaæem vam. ovde se æelim osvrnuti na ãest dogaœaja apostolskih izleåenja bolesnih opisanih u ovoj knjizi. to ñu uåiniti. mogu zatraæiti od Oca. verovati u Njegovu moñ isceljivanja. Nekada samo isceljuje.212 Teoloãki åasopis. ja ñu uåiniti” (Jovan 14:12-14. Isus je otiãao Ocu i od onda pa do danas Hristovi sledbenici. 14:12-14). treba da verujemo da Isus oåekuje da mi idemo kod lekara koji ñe nas izleåiti od bolesti koje nisu izazvane od strane neåistih sila veñ zbog naãe nemarnosti oko oåuvanja zdravlja. u Isusovo ime. u svim ovim primerima vidimo da je potrebna vera u Isusa Hrista. N° 9 lekarima. i veña od ovih. Takoœe. nekada opraãta grehe pa isceljuje. . starosti ili nemoñi tela. naglasak je moj). 10:17-19. nekada izgoni demone i isceljuje. åetiri ñu analizirati a dva ñu samo prokomentarisati: 1. iako je u njemu Isus Nazareñanin ipak najvaæniji uåesnik. 3:1-16 – isceljenje hromog od roœenja. Isus je dao autoritet svojim uåenicima da u Njegovo ime åine joã veña åuda od onih koja je i On sam åinio dok je æiveo na zemlji (Lk. zaista. ko veruje u mene åiniñe dela koja ja åinim. kada govorimo o bolestima u svetlu novozavetnog otkrivenja ne smemo izostaviti apostole (uåenike Hristove) i njihove postavke prema bolestima. a Luka tako uokviravajuñi ozdravljenje uspeva izazvati najsnaæniji utisak kod åitatelja. Ovo je velika istina. i ãto god zaiãtete u moje ime. da se dogode i åuda. Apostoli i bolesti U ovom delu rada bih hteo da kaæem neãto o tome kako su se apostoli postavljali prema bolestima i ãta su åinili po pitanju toga jer Isus je rekao uåenicima: “Zaista. Petrovo “pogledaj u nas” pojaåava napetost. Jvn. Ako me ãto zamolite u moje ime. verujuñi u Njegovo ime.

11 12 12 13 13 14 14 15 15 . i reåima i delom. veñ silom Duha Svetog. 75. Vidi: Verman: 2000: str. ovde vidimo da se ispunila molitva apostola iz Dela 4:29-30. bili su isceljeni.11 “Hriãñani imaju neãto mnogo bolje ãto mogu da podele.10 “U ime Isusa iz Nazareta” znaåi “autoritetom Isusa Hrista”. ili autoritet. nego i ozdravlja. Njegovo ime koje ne samo ãto opraãta (Dela 2:38). Ova åuda su oåitovala silu Mesije koji je bio razapet i vaskrsnut iz mrtvih i koji je i u ovakvim trenucima bio sa uåenicima. Vidi: Verman: 2000: str. Carson: 1994: str. Åuda ãto su ovde navedena nadilaze ona kojima su nas do sad obavestila Dela apostolska. Vidi: Lee Ash: 1986: str. Ovde se priseñamo masovnih ozdravljenja koja je Isus pre åinio.15 10 10 11 Vidi: Lee Ash: 1986: str. i to ne Petrovom senkom. Dogaœala su se åuda. Apostoli nisu isceljivali svojom sopstvenom silom. …”i vera – do koje dolazimo njegovim posredstvom – dala mu je potpuno zdravlje pred svima vama”.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 213 onda je moñno Isusovo ime poåelo delovati. sila Boæija se kroz njih pokazivala u mnogim znacima i åudima. 11. To je upravo ono ãto je Petar imao ( i dao) .13 Ljudi koji bi proãli pored Petrove senke ili ako je ona padala na bolesnike. propovedala reå.14 Zapravo. U ovom odeljku se govori o mnogim åudima koja su se zbivala preko apostolskih ruku. 15.posveñenje koje dolazi kroz veru u ime. 1073. 54. Petar je dao do znanja. Isusa Hrista”12 Odgovor koji je dao apostol Petar u Delima 4:8-10 je jednak odgovoru koji je dao u Delima 4:16. Vidi: Carson: 1994: str. Koristeñi Isusovo ime. 5:12-16 – Isus je kroz apostole leåio bolesnike. 1075. stekli su poãtovanje. 2. veñ Boæijom silom koja je delovala kroz Petra. ko mu je dao autoritet i moñ da isceljuje.

Buduñi da je Pavle bio posrednik u izvrãenju Boæijih åuda. Pavle je zapazio hromog åoveka kako pomno prati njegov govor i kako ima veru u spasenje. 2:22 i 10:38). Jvn. samo je Bog sada åinio åuda kroz Pavla. kod åuda koja je Isus åinio17 (“. 9:12. Ove reåi sadræe opis nesvakidaãnjih hriãñanskih åudesa. o upotrebi nekog predmeta i dodira (Lk. 14:3). ova åuda su se odigrala u mestu u kojem je bilo mnogo crne magije i okultizma. 19:11. bilo je logiåno da ta odeña nema snagu dok ne dotakne apostolovo telo. N° 9 3. Luka je ovo zapisao namerno jer je smatrao da ova åuda nisu “obiåna”. baã kao i ovde. Ovaj odeljak nam govori o istom sluåaju kao i sa Petrom u 5:12-16.16 Drugo. 15. Vidi: Carson: 1994: str. 6:19. U takvom mestu je Bog pokazao svoju silu kroz Pavla åinivãi neobiåna åuda. Åuda su imala znaåajnu ulogu u Isusovom delovanju (Dl. 5. Kada se apostol Pavle prvi put sreo sa vaskrslim Hristom na putu za Damask privremeno je ostao slep. 12 – Bog åini velika isceljenja i åuda kroz Pavla. nas ne treba da iznenadi to da Bog moæe da isceljuje. 4. Sa nekog rastojanja mu je snaænim glasom rekao da ustane. 4:40. 9:8-18 – Pavle je progledao nakon nekog vremena. 221. 22:51. 5:13. Jedan uåenik po imenu Ananija. veñ nas u ovom sluåaju pomalo iznenaœuje Lukin izveãtaj o naåinu isceljenja koji ne nalazimo ni u evanœeljima. 14:8-10 – isceljenje hromog od roœenja kroz Pavla. Dl. Verovatno je Pavle to uåinio u Isusovo ime da hromi prohoda iako to u tekstu nije jasno spomenuto.214 Teoloãki åasopis. 1096.. i veña od ovih…”). 9:6. 13:13. dolazi do Pavla nakon nekoliko dana i polaæe ruke na njega da u ime Isusa progleda i ispuni se Duhom.dela koja ja åinim. 16 16 17 Vidi: Lee Ash: 1986: str.7. 8:54. Meœutim. Ljudi su pokuãavali uz pomoñ nekih magijskih formula da pokuãaju da åine åuda. 5:12. Brojna åuda u Novom zavetu su zavisila. 17 .

Moæemo pretpostaviti da su Pavle i drugi hriãñani propovedali dobru vest i imali nekoliko uspeha. sem fiziåkih. 28:7-9 – Pavle se moli za Pubijevog oca i on biva isceljen kao i mnogi drugi bolesnici na Malti. vaæno mi je da napomenem da. ozdravljenje je doãlo kroz molitvu i polaganje Pavlovih ruku na bolesnika. postoje i duhovni aspetki bolesti. Vidi: Lee Ash: 1986: str. Zbog toga. za koje åak smatram da su prioritetniji. 19 20 20 . samo ili prvenstveno. Ne znamo da li Luka ovde implicira egzorcizam. Samo na ovom putovanju. 293. Pavle je nastavio da sluæi drugima. Ne znamo jer se ne spominju zli duhovi kod sluåaja ove bolesti. danas ñemo prvenstveno pomisliti na lekare i traæiñemo njihovo miãljenje. iako tekst ne govori o tome. onda treba da. treba se moliti za isceljenje da Bog ozdravi tu osobu.1199 Meœutim. Ovim istraæivanjem æelim da ukaæem da. dijagnoze i terapije. 1106.20 Implikacije Kada su bolesti u pitanju. ako posmatramo kompletno ljudsko biñe. Vidi: Carson: 1994: str. Ovo ozdravljenje je privuklo mnoge da doœu kod Pavla iz istog razloga. snaæno je uzdrmao æivote kapetana. Neki pisci komentrara misle da ih je izleåio lekar Luka koji je bio sa Pavlom. kao i mnoge druge. 81. govori se samo da su bili poåaãñeni na mnoge naåine. Pavlova molitva i polaganje ruku izleåili su ga. glavnog zvaniånika Malte. Bog je sve ovo vodio i uåinio da Pavle i ostali sa broda budu dobro snabdeveni za put do Rima. i oni su ozdravljali. 18 Otac ovog malteãkog vladara je bio bolestan. Svrhu bolesti nalazim u duhovnoj oblasti i zato smatram da nije dovoljno samo se fokusirati i leåiti fiziåke aspekte bolesti. 18 18 19 Vidi: Verman: 2000: str.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 215 6. bolest bude tretirana na duhovni naåin. imao je groznicu i srdobolju. åak i u poloæaju brodolomnika u okovima. ukoliko vidimo jasan duhovni uzrok bolesti.

7:21. 8:16. Ovo se moæe izbeñi ako se osoba uputi na odgovarajuñe psihijatrijsko leåenje. Isterivao je demone iz slepih i nemih (Mt.13. Mk. ovde su u pitanju duhovni aspekti bolesti. 69.21 Slaæem se sa Andersonom. 5:16. Ali moæeã biti u ropstvu jer si previdio ili zanijekao realnost demonskih sila koje su na djelu u danaãnjem svijetu”. 8:26-39). Kada dr Peter H. Lk. on ustanovljava tri uzroka bolesti: greh. Isceljivanje bolesti i izgon demona nije uvek jedno te isto (Mk. 12:22. Mt. Dl. Lk. 11:14-15) i iz onih poremeñena uma (Mt. pa åak i duhovnog fanatizma. Kada su u pitanju duhovni aspekti bolesti. Oropeza citira Basil Jackson: Oropeza: 2001: str. izbegavam ovde da generalizujem ili da iznosim neke zakljuåke koji bi u ovoj oblasti doveli do neke vrste iskljuåivosti. N° 9 Dakle. 1:34.22 Kada su u pitanju duãevne bolesti. 68. neizobraæenih ljudi napravilo je viãe ãtete nego dobra prepoznavajuñi demone ondje gdje ih nije bilo”. Isus je iz deåaka isterao demona padavice (Mt. 9:32-34. 115.23 Pogreãna dijagnoza opsednutosti demonima moæe imati katastrofalne posledice na nekoga ko je duãevno ili emocionalno bolestan pa to moæe uzrokovati snaæan oseñaj krivice i oseñaj da ih je Bog odbacio. Zato. Anderson:2002: str. U I Kor. Lk. Mk. 33. ali ne smemo misliti da je u svakom sluåaju slepoñe. 17:14-21. Bog i demonske sile. Greh je uzrok bolesti. Zaista trebam odgovore na ovakva pitanja i verujem da se odgovor razlikuje od sluåaja do sluåaja. Previãe revnih. 9:14-29. 8:28-34. padavice ili drugih bolesti uzrok delovanje demona. 8:7). 11:30. Demoni mogu biti uzrok bolesti. Davids govori u knjizi “Wrestiling with dark angels”o bolestima s duhovnih aspekata. Lk. moæemo se zapitati sledeñe: da li su demoni uzrok bolesti? Novi zavet navodi mnoge primere gde su demoni uzroånici bolesti. 22 23 23 . “ne tvrdim da je svaki duhovni problem rezultat direktne demonske aktivnosti. 5:1-20.216 Teoloãki åasopis. 9:37-43). Pavle objaãnjava da neki u Korintu su slabi i bolesni zato ãto je njihov greh bio to ãto nisu 21 21 22 Vidi: Oropeza: 2001: str. “nemojte pobrkati duãevni poremeñaj s demonom.

Verujem. Korinñani (I Kor. smatram da Bog ponekad interveniãe i na taj naåin. Luka 13:10-17 govori o æeni koja je zgråena oko 18 godina od “duha bolesti”. Smatram da Bog dozvoljava bolest zbog odreœenog cilja.25 Istina je da je ljusko biñe zbog pada u greh postalo podloæno mnogim vrstama bolesti. Milaãinoviñ: 1995: str. 12:20-23). Zato nam je od velike pomoñi klasiåna medicina koja u danaãnje vreme åini skoro åuda. Ljudsko telo koje je Bog savrãeno stvorio nakon pada u greh ne funkcioniãe onako kako ga je Bog naåinio da funkcioniãe. Meœutim. Gresi neopraãtanja i nepomirenja. i samo zdravlje”.24 Dimitrije Kaleziñ smatra da je ljudsko biñe inficirano grehom i da je greh najåeãñi uzrok bolesti (neåiste sile ni ne spominje). gresi neverja poput odbacivanja milostivoga Boga ili ravnoduãnosti. Demonske sile su uzrok bolesti. da li je Bog ikada uzrok bolesti? U Starom zavetu jeste (II Kr. 121-124. kao u sluåaju Jova da je Bog dozvolio Satani da iskuãa Jova i na taj naåin. Zato smatram da je potrebno otiñi kod lekara i posavetovati se sa 24 24 25 Vidi: Wagner: 1990: str. U I Kor.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 217 uvaæavali jedinstvo u Telu kao Gospodnju veåeru. 13:6-12). Ljudska istraæivanja o raznim bolestima i o njihovom leåenju su dostigla visok nivo. 15:5) a i u Novom zavetu: Irod Agripa (Dl. i to je Boæiji dar. On smatra da do isceljenja od takve bolesti se dolazi ako je åovekova liånost okrenuta “Bogu radi unutraãnje ili mistiåne saradnje – to je uslov za zdravlje. Mada. Pavle zapoveda crkvama da odbace sramne greãnike koje ñe Satana uzeti za “propast tela”. Bog je uzrok bolesti. 25 . Meœutim. 218-221. Ako je greh uzrok bolesti. U Novom zavetu su demoske sile viãe u vezi sa bolestima nego ãto je Bog. uzeo bih to kao izuzetke ali ne i kao pravilo. Varisus (Dl. 5:5. vraåarstva i idolopoklonstva. ne bih se sasvim sloæio sa dr Davidson u vezi toga da je Bog uzrok bolesti. lakomstva. i joã neki mogu se direktno putem Duha Svetoga dovesti u vezu kod nekih osoba koje su zgreãile i obolele. kao ãto je i dr Davidson naveo neke svetopisamske primere. 11).

N° 9 njima kada smo bolesni. Slaæem se sa dr Jovanom N. Ukoliko Bog i klasiåna medicina. ako je neko bolestan i ne moæe da ozdravi treba da zna da je duãa vaænija od tela i da treba da se mnogo viãe fokusira na spasenje svoje duãe kroz veru u Isusa Hrista. nemojmo uvek smatrati da je u pitanju neki demon jer je vrlo lako moguñe da je u pitanju samo neka telesna bolest koju ñe lekari reãiti bez ikakve muke. kao Boæiji dar. Ãto se tiåe bele magije. Zakljuåio bih da ne bi bilo mudro da pokuãamo da gradimo bilo kakvu generalizaciju o bolestima na osnovu izabranih svetopisamskih odlomaka. I molitva vere spaãñe bolesnika. kroz krizu verovanja. dakle. S druge strane. kao moñnog Isceljitelja. biñe mu oproãteno. pa neka se pomole nad njim i pomaæu ga uljem u ime Gospodnje. da pravimo neki univerzalni duhovni recept. Bela magija pokuãava da otkloni bolest jer ne moæe da izleåi åoveka. Strikoviñem. pre svega. 26 Sveto pismo nam kaæe ãta da åinimo kada su u pitanju bolesti: “Boluje li ko meœu vama? Neka dozove crkvene stareãine. Inaåe. Kada razmiãljam o duhovnim aspektima bolesti mislim samo na jedno reãenje: vera u Isusa Hrista. Drugim reåima. koje u svojoj alebiciji hoñe da nas usreñe. Ispovedajte. Izmeœu ostalog. sile i one druge. Trebamo molitvom priñi Bogu i traæiti vodstvo Svetoga Duha da nam razjasni i da silu da reãimo odreœenu situaciju kada je bolest u pitanju. smatram da tu nema nikakve druge ãanse da se åovek izleåi na ispravan naåin. i Gospod ñe ga podiñi. “dobronamerna”. “kriza savremene civilizacije prepoznaje se. ako je i uåinio grehe. kao imanentna potreba i spiritus movens naãe egzistencije jesu tvrœava na koje su kidisale sile neåastive. Religiozna oseñanja. trebamo koristititi i taj Boæiji dar. bolest moæe biti samo prosto oboljenje neåega. ne izleåe åoveka. odnosno unesreñe”. jedan drugome grehe i molite se Bogu 26 Milaãinoviñ: 1995: Unutraãnja stranica na poleœinskoj korici knjige.218 Teoloãki åasopis. 26 . smatram da je ona od œavola iako se pokazuje kao pozitivna.

” (Jak. ur. Hrvatska: Logos Daruvar. A. Molitva vere. Ovo je po mom miãljenju prvi korak kada su u pitanju bolesti. posredniåka delotvorna molitva pravednika i isceljivanje u ime Gospodnje (u ime Isusa Hrista). CITIRANA DELA Anderson T. su za mene prvi i kljuåni postupci pri ozdravljenju ili isceljenju bolesnika. Mnogo moæe delotvorna molitva pravednika. usvojiti bez prisustva vere. Zato trebamo znati da “smisao naãeg æivota i æivljenja nije u onom smislu koji ñe odrediti neko drugi veñ u egzistenciji vere. Zaista. 5:14-16 naglasci su moji!). Ne moæe se ni opstati ni ostati bez njenog udela!”27 Vera je kljuå. da budete isceljeni. . Galvin C. kojom se oznaåava vrhunska strast kao vera. Ovi stihovi nam govore kako da najpravilnije postupimo da ne bismo napravili katastrofalne greãke. 1994 New bible commentary. Dæejms 1999 Luka: celokupan biblijski tekst sa beleãkama za prouåavanje. Downers Grove. Lee Ash Antony 1986 Djela apostolska: tumaåenje Djela apostolskih. voleti. niãta se ne moæe razumeti. 27 27 Isto. prihvatiti. Novi Sad: Meœunarodno biblijsko druãtvo SR Jugoslavije. Neil 2002 On lomi okove. Illinois: IVP. ispovedanje greha.Protestantski teoloãki fakultet 219 jedan za drugoga. Carson D. Daruvar. Novi Sad: DOBRA VEST.

. Peter 1990 Wrestling with dark angels. Beograd: ZAVOD ZA BOLESTI ZAVISNOSTI I PARTENON M.220 Teoloãki åasopis. Moris Leon 1983 Luka: tumaåenje Evanœelja po Luki. Ventura. U.S. Novi Sad: DOBRA VEST. Wagner C. Hrvatska: STEPress. 2000 O anœelima. Novi zavet: prevod dr Emilijana M. IZDANJE BIBLIJSKOG DRUÃTVA BEOGRAD. N° 9 Milaãinoviñ Jasmina 1995 Religija i duãevni æivot åoveka. Verman R. Zagreb.: Regal Books. Kalifornija. Oropeza B. Åarniña.M. Javier. Novi Sad: Meœunarodno biblijsko druãtvo SR Jugoslavije. David 2001 Dela apostolska: celokupan biblijski tekst sa beleãkama za prouåavanje. demonima i duhovnom ratovanju: 99 pitanja i odgovora.A.A.